Grimsby train worker sacked, TPE South staff plan strike.

[Solent&Wessex]

Have been told drivers are going out on strike in support of a driver who has been removed from driving due to a safety incident , anyone have any inside info

TPE Drivers will not be working any Rest Days or Overtime from 27th June. This is due to an ongoing dispute about rostering which I gather has been going on pretty much the whole length of the franchise with the company not meeting their promises and key targets. Lack of Rest Day working and Overtime normally causes a lot of disruption and ad-hoc cancellations and alterations.

In addition they will be going on Strike on 9th July. This is in dispute with management over Aslef's claim that the company has not followed agreed processes and procedures in relation to a driver who had a safety incident and was permanently removed from the driving grade.

 

[XC90]

I have not taken much notice before but the gap between the platform and the train is wide enough to fall down and had Glenn pressed the button he could have been thrown off balance and then they would would have had a very nasty mess to clear up, so I think he did the right thing. The safety regulations are okay to use in other circumstances but not on this occasion.

Your right. I was too hard on the conductor. I know a brief went out regarding the st James incident and that's probably what will go against him.

It's sad that if you follow the rules and injure someone it's okay, but if you don't follow the rules and don't injure someone, you have some explaining to do and possible livelihood to lose.

Use the nut TPE!

 

[ComUtoR]

It's sad that if you follow the rules and injure someone it's okay, but if you don't follow the rules and don't injure someone, you have some explaining to do and possible livelihood to lose.

Whats sad is that some people believe that no one got injured so everything is peachy.

We had a driver today up for dismissal for a reset and go. No one was injured so...

 

[XC90]

Whats sad is that some people believe that no one got injured so everything is peachy.

We had a driver today up for dismissal for a reset and go. No one was injured so...

Keeping it context. If the train stopped suddenly and the surfer fell and injured himself or worse, the conductor would have been ok. However, using his judgement at the time the incident was taking place, he felt it safer to carry on and the incident was over and everyone back in their beds sleeping nicely that night.

One size fits all approach doesn't always work. Let people on the ground/train get on with it and manage the situations they come across as they see fit. Guidance is needed, not a hardback book thrown at them.

 

[455driver]

We had a driver today up for dismissal for a reset and go. No one was injured so...

And following the correct procedure wouldn't have had the potential to hurt anyone either!

Hardly the same sort of thing is it! :roll:

 

[Clip]

I am so glad that you all stick to the rules regardless, just like the Germans did in the concentration camps during that little dispute in the 1940s!

I notice that a few of you wouldn't have minded if the train was stopped and the little darling fell off and was killed, at least the guard would have been in the clear, I mean following orders is the most important thing isn't it!

He had a split second to make the decision and the decision he made caused no harm, can anyone state categorically that if he had made the other decision that the result would have been the same!

You are all looking at it with the benefit of hindsight, something not available at the time!

You're right, hindsight is a wonderful thing.

However if there is a policy that the guard should stop the train if they see a person in danger and that was not followed then the guard in that instance was wrong.

ANorthernguard summed it up on the first page really

If you don't follow Procedures nowadays you are in for the high jump and sent packing. Everyone knows this. Its a shame a colleague has lost his job but procedures HAVE to come first and sadly common sense second.

You also cannot say with hindsight that the little runt would've come to any harm either so to try and use that as a side argument for him not to stop the train is a different side to the same coin.

Lets face it in years gone by when we had slam door trains people were getting off them whilst they were still moving and stopping too and I didn't see stories of them falling to their deaths given the thousands of times per day people did it - even at stations with big gaps.

Whether he deserved to lose his job on this one incident, I still haven't made up my mind.

 

[ComUtoR]

Hardly the same sort of thing is it! :roll:

It is the same thing. BOTH are a failure to follow rules and regs.

IF the kid held on and slipped then there is potential risk. Just because something didn't happen doesn't mean it wouldn't have. The Guard was in a catch 22 situation.

I hardly need to explain the potential risks from a reset and go.

We also have rules that I really don't like either and that do not reflect the real world. I have personally been in a situation where following a rule put a life in danger.

We don't live in a world where we can apply the benefit of that hindsight and
having a more flexible approach opens people up to litigation and liability. There is some degree of flexibility in that we have Rules and Local policy. Some local policy is more flexible than others and some are rigorously enforced.

We have rather draconion driving policies and always want that ability to be the decision maker based on experience, skill, and conditions. Every leaf fall period the first thing that is looked at on a slip through is the adherece to policy. Everyone else who may/may not be following policy but keep their train under control gets away with it and the railway turns a blind eye because nothing went wrong.

Stonegate was the classic example of this. The Driver adhered to policy so was totally exonerated but it was still the first thing they looked at. RAIB investigations do the same. rules/policy come before real world decisions.

Do I like it ? NO ! I do understand why it is important.

We have always been taught that rules and policy come out of previous incidents and over my time on the railway I have seen that happening. We are about to get another new policy because of an incident which may or may not have happened because of procedures. I see incidents happen because of hard and fast rule following and also seen those that ignore rules win awards.

I would much prefer the RMT pushing for policy changes which allow for some decision making on the front line. I would also like to see them advocating better disciplinary procedures which use a retraining and development approach rather than the big stick. Sadly another fact we have overlooked is that those procedures that the guard failed to follow and the disciplinary procedures that were used are agreed by the union.

Isn't the railway fun

 

[craigybagel]

Surely a reset and go is a calculated decision where the only benefit in doing it is avoiding trouble, it doesn't have any positive safety benefits?
Whereas at Cleethorpes the guard had a split second decision over what was the safest course of action,and he chose the option that he thought was safest, but goes against the rule book.
Also, a reset and go is a deliberate attempt to avoid management finding out what you've done, whereas I this instance the guard actually reported what has happened himself to management?
I can see why both instances could be seen as doing the wrong thing, but surely a reset and go is much more indefensible?

 

[Orchid]

Surely a reset and go is a calculated decision where the only benefit in doing it is avoiding trouble, it doesn't have any positive safety benefits?
Whereas at Cleethorpes the guard had a split second decision over what was the safest course of action,and he chose the option that he thought was safest, but goes against the rule book.
Also, a reset and go is a deliberate attempt to avoid management finding out what you've done, whereas I this instance the guard actually reported what has happened himself to management?
I can see why both instances could be seen as doing the wrong thing, but surely a reset and go is much more indefensible?

Agree, the comparison between this incident and a TPWS reset & go is ludicrous.

The discussion of whether or not the guard did anything wrong is moot anyway. Everyone, including the guard, agrees that he should have stopped the train. However, the issue is the harshness of the outcome with many arguing that it should never have even been disciplinary and should have instead been seen as a retraining issue. To sack someone with a ten year clean record over this is exceptionally harsh when you consider what happens to others who transgress.

I have seen people survive disciplinary hearings where the transgression was far far worse than this. I can see this strike action spreading across the company and becoming protracted.

 

[ComUtoR]

I can see why both instances could be seen as doing the wrong thing, but surely a reset and go is much more indefensible?

Very much indefensible.

It is just to highlight that the following the rules comes as a priority and it doesn't matter if we agree or not. It also highlights that the consequence isn't important. Nothing happened when the reset and go occurred so by some people logic that seems to be acceptable.

I also mentioned that there are other incidents that happen where a split second decision is made for the right reason but is still against the rules.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
The guard also made a calculated decision to ignore policy. Any investigation shows his actions to be deliberate.

Pretty much all RAIB investigations are just as clinical. Those above only see black and white.

 

[craigybagel]

Very much indefensible.

It is just to highlight that the following the rules comes as a priority and it doesn't matter if we agree or not. It also highlights that the consequence isn't important. Nothing happened when the reset and go occurred so by some people logic that seems to be acceptable.

I also mentioned that there are other incidents that happen where a split second decision is made for the right reason but is still against the rules.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
The guard also made a calculated decision to ignore policy. Any investigation shows his actions to be deliberate.

Pretty much all RAIB investigations are just as clinical. Those above only see black and white.

Fair point. But does any breech of the rules deserve dismissal? As we've just shown, a reset and go and what happened here are two very different circumstances, but they are ending up with the same punishment (assuming the stop and go driver is dismissed). Is that fair? And if it is fair, does any breakage of the rules, any tiny deviation from policy, deserve dismissal as well?

 

[ComUtoR]

Fair point. But does any breech of the rules deserve dismissal?

No but the serious breaches do. This is considered by TPE to be a serious breach.

As we've just shown, a reset and go and what happened here are two very different circumstances, but they are ending up with the same punishment (assuming the stop and go driver is dismissed). Is that fair?

As highlighted above. Both are considered to be serious enough. There is also the point that we do not know the history of the Guard involved or the minutiae of the incident. It is speculation that TPE just blindly fired the guy. The fairness is hopefully achieved by following procedure and carrying out a rigorous investigation.

There is another thread about TPE strikes and ASLEF making a claim that a Driver was unfairly dismissed. This RMT strike isn't saying he was unfairly dismissed or that TPE failed to follow the correct procedures in his dismissal. Nowhere does it say that what the Guard did was right. Like others here they believe it is heavy handed.

And if it is fair, does any breakage of the rules, any tiny deviation from policy, deserve dismissal as well?

We are taught a lot about error and violation and that is partially used as a yardstick to measure the seriousness of an incident. There are plenty of incidents that do not result in someone being sacked so your point that any breach deserves dismissal can be discounted because there is already a process where some breaches are a matter for retraining and other punitive measures. This isn't a tiny deviation. This incident should be covered by agreed policy.

I posted that I don't believe there should be such a draconian measure.

I would much prefer the RMT pushing for policy changes which allow for some decision making on the front line. I would also like to see them advocating better disciplinary procedures which use a retraining and development approach rather than the big stick.

Just because I too don't believe that this warranted dismissal doesn't change the fact that it is considered by TPE and other guards in this thread to be serious enough to fall under dismissal.

 

[GrimsbyPacer]

Breaking News!!

BBC Look North (Humber/Lincs/NWNorfolk), have announced the strike has been called off.
An acceptable deal is reported to have been reached, Glenn the conductor has not been re-employed however. No other information at present.

 

[transmanche]

Breaking News!!

BBC Look North (Humber/Lincs/NWNorfolk), have announced the strike has been called off.
An acceptable deal is reported to have been reached, Glenn the conductor has not been re-employed however. No other information at present.

The Grimsby Telegraph quotes the RMT as saying:

"Thanks to the determination of his colleagues to see justice done, an agreement has today been reached which is acceptable to Brother Watson and consequently the dispute is now over," the Union said.

"Therefore all industrial action has been suspended and members should work normally. Also, all local protests and demonstrations are cancelled.

"This dispute has highlighted the problem of train operators automatically dealing with safety incidents as disciplinary issues rather than as training matters.

"I am pleased to advise you that thanks to pressure from your union, TPE has agreed to introduce a Fair Culture Policy with associated lifesaving rules, similar to the one used by Network Rail.

"This is a major breakthrough as it means what happened to Brother Watson cannot happen again.

"The Network Rail Policy will be tabled at the next TPE Joint Safety Committee for full discussion with your reps in order to draw up an equivalent policy.

 

[FordFocus]

TPE Drivers still going to cause management problems though.

First Group, sack first, ask questions later. :roll:

 

[455driver]

First Group, sack first, ask questions later. :roll:

Its not always like that, sometimes they don't bother asking the questions!

I am glad this is sorted, of course it will all be confidential about how much they paid him*.



* no I don't have any proof that he was paid off but isn't that always the way with these things!

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

In addition they will be going on Strike on 9th July. This is in dispute with management over Aslef's claim that the company has not followed agreed processes and procedures in relation to a driver who had a safety incident and was permanently removed from the driving grade.

Many thanks for this advance information, as on that particular Thursday, we had intended to visit Durham Cathedral, so we will make alternative arrangements now.

 

[scott118]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-33275404

Industrial action by more than 40 train conductors on the Transpennine Express route between Sheffield and Cleethorpes has been cancelled, the RMT union said.
The dispute with the train operator was over the dismissal of Glen Watson, a conductor on the service.
Transpennine Express said Mr Watson's employment had now ended on "mutually accepted terms".
The RMT said all local protests were over and thanked members for their support during the dispute.
Three 24-hour strikes had been held.
The dispute started when Mr Watson was dismissed after a train-surfing incident at Cleethorpes station.
Transpennine Express said the conductor did not force the train to stop and deal with the matter properly.
The train operator has agreed to discuss a new policy at a joint safety committee for dealing with such problems, said the RMT.

 

[plastictaffy]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-33275404

"mutually accepted terms".

They gave him a stack of cash.........

 

[joeh917]

It's not what I expected to happen but it is better than the sack, in the distant future he could perhaps do the same job for a different rail company in another part of the UK.

 

[ComUtoR]

It's not what I expected to happen but it is better than the sack,

He has no job so all future earnings is staring him in the face. The railway is well paid and it it a difficult time for employment out there. His pension is no longer being contributed into and unless he has made significant contribution then it is a big loss. How much it that worth ? He wouldn't have got a lot

in the distant future he could perhaps do the same job for a different rail company in another part of the UK.

I doubt that. It is not unheard of that those who do make errors do get jobs on a different TOC but it isn't often and will be a difficult ask. I was surprised he wasn't offered redeployment in the first instance. Gonna be hard but I wish him the best.


I would say that the best that has come out of this is the agreement on new policy. I suspect that will still be to stop the train but allow 'fair culture' to apply a degree of common sense with disciplinary action.

 

[gimmea50anyday]

It is rumoured he has been employed by Northern Rail, although no details of his position have been confirmed

 

[lincolnshire]

It is rumoured he has been employed by Northern Rail, although no details of his position have been confirmed

Well there is not much Northern Rail staff wise in the Grimsby/Cleethorpes area as the Barton Flyer is operated by First TPE staff even though its a Northern service. No station on the route are manned so if he,s working for Northern then the nearest outpost of Northern is across the river in Hull which will involve additional expense getting to and from work.

Back in the old days a job might have be found in another department of the railway e.g offered a P.Way job under supervision and at least you still have a job. But since everything is not one joined up railway anymore them days are gone.

 

[GrimsbyPacer]

Well there is not much Northern Rail staff wise in the Grimsby/Cleethorpes area as the Barton Flyer is operated by First TPE staff even though its a Northern service. No station on the route are manned so if he,s working for Northern then the nearest outpost of Northern is across the river in Hull which will involve additional expense getting to and from work.

Back in the old days a job might have be found in another department of the railway e.g offered a P.Way job under supervision and at least you still have a job. But since everything is not one joined up railway anymore them days are gone.

Or he might work from Doncaster as that's where the first Barton train comes from until it's cut when EMT takeover and ruin it all.
Also I never heard it called Barton Flyer (cool name), I was however, under the impression the service is officially branded as The Humberlinc.

 

[Carlisle]

JI

I would much prefer the RMT pushing for policy changes which allow for some decision making on the front line. I would also like to see them advocating better disciplinary procedures which use a retraining and development approach rather than the big stick.

:

Well said , the unions certainly should at least try to be more pro active in pursuing the changes you suggest,yes procedures/transparency and employment laws have improved things in the last 30 years or so however the number of Health and Safety related dismissals in the rail and bus industries seems to have increased considerably in that time judging by people I speak to i

 

[Aictos]

According to the RMT magazine, he was found a alternative position within FTPE but the company didn't agree.

Even if he wasn't permitted to be safety critical anymore, surely they could have had him in a non safety critical role?

 

[HH]

According to the RMT magazine, he was found a alternative position within FTPE but the company didn't agree.

Even if he wasn't permitted to be safety critical anymore, surely they could have had him in a non safety critical role?

Of course they could have. None of us have any idea why they didn't, but presumably they had good reasons.

 

[lincolnshire]

According to the RMT magazine, he was found a alternative position within FTPE but the company didn't agree.

Even if he wasn't permitted to be safety critical anymore, surely they could have had him in a non safety critical role?

The problem these days if your fully staffed up in the area e.g Cleethorpes, Grimsby & Scunthorpe where do find him a job ? as next place is Hull & Brough in the closer area. After that its larger travelling distances to work and who,s going to pay for that then or want to travel large distances everyday to work?
Move house maybe? but whats the price of houses to where your moving too etc.

Just another sad fact of the railways splitting up .

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Just another sad fact of the railways splitting up .

Things have never been the same since the 1923 railway groupings when sworn enemies such as the London and North Western Railway found they now had to be much nicer when dealing with personages dealing with Midland Railway locomotives and staff...:roll:

 

[joeh917]

I have heard that he was given a years wages and has now got a job with Northern Rail in Hull. He will have to travel but if he has a car he will be able to claim travel allowance which he will what ever way he travels. He has had a rough few months but it sounds like he has landed on his feet, good luck to him.