SOME of my most vivid memories of childhood in the 1970s are of my dad coming out on strike, several times. My mum, naturally, was worried about paying the bills and putting food on the table.

My dad’s factory – Weir’s in the south side of Glasgow – was one of a number of huge industrial workplaces in the West of Scotland that the newspapers labelled “hotbeds of militancy”.

These were the days when trade union strength was at its height. Power cuts and candles seemed to be part of winter life, and I remember being sent to join a long queue every day to buy a loaf of bread during a national bakers’ strike.

Even at an early age, I knew which side I was on. Strikes might cause inconvenience to the public and hardship to the families involved, but they were the last lines of defence for working people against exploitation. Without trade unions taking industrial action, we would still be working 16-hour days and dying regularly in workplace accidents.

RMT is on strike this week over Abellio’s proposal to extend driver-only operation to its new fleet of electric high-speed trains. We can expect much foaming and raging from sections of the press. We will hear callers to radio phone-in programmes blustering with rage at the impertinence of workers who dare to challenge their lords and masters. And we will read platitudes from politicians calling for dialogue, even though they are well aware that strikes only take place because dialogue has broken down.

When I was a Unison branch secretary representing thousands of hospital workers across the north of Glasgow, I was involved in two major strikes involving medical secretaries, hospital porters, domestics and other low-paid but essential staff. Neither of these actions were embarked on lightly. We had talked and talked and talked – and some of our shop stewards had a real gift of the gab. But we got nowhere.

Trade unionists spend the vast majority of their time talking and negotiating. But talking, without being prepared to back up words with action, is like going to the supermarket without a penny in your purse. And taking strike action is never an easy decision for workers.

So, what’s this rail dispute all about? The first thing to recognise is that it is being trivialised by Abellio’s spin doctors, led by Rob Shorthouse, the man who coined the phrase Project Fear when he was director of communications for Better Together. Their message is, in essence, “what’s all the fuss, driver-only operation is already happening, and this dispute is merely about who presses the buttons to open and close train doors”.

They claim there will always be a second person on the train anyway, inspecting tickets. The problem is that ticket inspectors are not guards. I’ve been speaking with an Abellio train driver, who shall remain anonymous as he fears victimisation.

As he points out, a guard’s purpose is safety. They check that when a train pulls into the platform, it is correctly positioned and won’t lead to a passenger falling on to the track – which does happen. Guards are trained to protect the line and the train in the event of fire, accident or other emergency situation. They can take over the operation of the train and communicate with the signaller if the driver becomes incapacitated – which, again, does happen.

Because of their safety role, a train cannot move without the presence, and say-so, of the guard. Ticket examiners have a purely commercial and customer service role – and the train can drive away without them. And it does.

Staffing shortages mean that many train journeys take place with just one worker on board. Abellio prioritises daytime services, which tend to be busier, more profitable, and more likely to be inspected for quality control. It means that the services most likely to have no staff in the carriages are those at night, when folk are more likely to be rowdy and under the influence. These are the times when predators tend to be on the hunt for an isolated potential victim.

All women have experienced the drunken lech who insists on sitting next to us on a train. Some of us have experienced worse. And women have been attacked on trains with no-one around to intervene – like the woman attacked early this year on a Bathgate train with no ticket examiner. Driver-only operation is a feminist issue.

My friend reports that, in the nine shifts he has worked in the past fortnight, his train has operated on 18 journeys without a ticket examiner. Every fortnight, the union receives reports of at least 300 trains travelling with just the driver on board. Increasingly, driver-only operation means just one worker on board – locked up in a cabin at the front of the train, far from many of the passengers.

Driver-only operation is also a disabled rights issue – especially for wheelchair users. Drivers have no wheelchair ramp training, so are not allowed to use them. People who use a wheelchair are expected to book assistance in advance – but many people don’t realise this. And why should they? They are entitled to expect equality of access to services.

If a wheelchair user turns up when the only worker around is a driver, Abellio tells them to wait for the next train. Where I live that could mean waiting for several hours – or the following day if it’s after 8.30pm. And when there’s just a lonely plastic shelter at many stations, that could easily end in tragedy.

Some drivers risk their jobs by getting out of the train to assist elderly and disabled passengers in these circumstances. But understandably, most stick to the rules. My friend knows of one instance where a carer had to get off a driver-only train in search of a ramp – and it promptly drove off, leaving the carer stranded on the platform and the disabled passenger abandoned on the train with not a single member of staff to turn to.

Instead of calling for RMT members to get back to work, the telephone callers, newspaper editors and politicians should be pushing for the reinstatement of guards. That would resolve this dispute instantly.

But it’s all about the bottom line. Driver-only operation means the train can move off 15 seconds faster. That seems to be more important than the women at risk of sexual assault or the wheelchair-using passenger left watching the back end of a train as it pulls away without them.

So, if you find yourself moaning about the train strikes this week – take a minute to think about what it’s all about. Hopefully, you’ll realise there’s a lot more at stake than your mild inconvenience.