Bishopstone
Established Member
Guards join at the airport, southbound, on the peak Brighton extensions which call at stations without platform staff. Vice versa northbound.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Gatwick Express Industrial Relations
- Thread starter spangles
- Start date
- Status
Guards join at the airport, southbound, on the peak Brighton extensions which call at stations without platform staff. Vice versa northbound.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Deepgreen
Established Member
It's a question, but not the key one, which is (I think); was agreement reached or even thought to be needed, for the specific GatEx 12 car operations, or did GTR management assume that the agreement (again, assuming one is in place) for TL 12 car trains would cover the issue? If it hadn't been this 'launch' working, the issue would have arisen, presumably, the first time a 12 car formation was used.
A further question might be; what is different about the GatEx workings in ASLEF's view that sets them apart from the TL workings with virtually the same stock on almost the same route?
Last edited:
87015
Established Member
If there is no agreement you don't allocate 12 cars to a train that can't be worked as a 12 car. Who knows what control were doing, not controlling, clearly... The driver can't take it if there is no agreement to do so, the question is how /why did a 12 car end up in the platform for it.
87015
Established Member
It's not unofficial action. If 12 car DOO isn't signed off, it can't be used in service. No different to stock the driver doesn't sign sitting there - its not passed to be in service.
headshot119
Established Member
If they haven't signed off on 12 car DOO operation, they haven't signed off on it.
From what I can see the driver has done nothing wrong.
I suspect many of us may live in a world where if we don't obey a legitimate instruction we are likely to be in deep trouble.
headshot119
Established Member
The instruction isn't legitimate if the company and the union haven't come to an agreement over DOO trains longer than 10 coaches in length.
Personally I'm opposed to all DOO working; as many on here will know. If the Union and Company had come to an agreement over 12 coach DOO trains and the driver refused to open the doors, then I would agree disciplinary action would be appropriate.
If I didn't obey a legitimate instruction in the work place, I would face disciplinary action.
What people don't seem to realise is that rail staff having an incident, face the ultimate penalty like Christopher McGee did, like the signaller at Moreton-On-Lugg, and what possibly Mr Zee (another Merseyrail guard) may face. Because of the consequences railway staff nationwide are extremely reluctant to do anything if they are not 100% sure it is authorised, and that they'll have the backing of both there company and union if they have an incident. Can you blame them for that? I certainly can't.
Last edited:
Presume it would fail PPM as it didn't call at all booked stations?
"legitimate instructions" do not mean "blind obedience"
trainmania100
Established Member
The driver probably loved them so much he didn't want to get it dirty
As for the passengers, they might have been Thankful for missing it and getting they luxury seats of a 442
As for the passengers, they might have been Thankful for missing it and getting they luxury seats of a 442
Last edited:
southern442
Established Member
I didn't realise that they were building 81 387/2's 
Agreed. I think the key question is: is the length of a train working under DOO arrangements something that is specified in drivers' terms and conditions, and thus if changed, something that requires a consultation or negotiation. If the answer is no, then ASLEF are on a sticky wicket. If it is yes, then GTR probably have a long summer in front of them.
This is a separate issue to whether the 12 coach trains are accepted for use in DOO, which is around safety case management. In this case they must be, as I have been on a 12 car 387/2 that was in passenger service between Gatwick and London (albeit Blackfriars).
There is at least one other operator who had a similar issue with ASLEF recently, where members were instructed not to drive longer trains under DOO, but on an erroneous basis, as train length was not specified in the DOO agreement. Needless to say in that case the longer trains are running DOO now.
Last edited:
Robertj21a
On Moderation
- Joined
- 22 Sep 2013
- Messages
- 7,691
Is it worth just asking what the actual objection is to the 12-car trains as DOO ?
Is it solely that there hasn't been an agreement, or is there also a specific issue at stake with 12 vs 10 coaches on that route/service ?
Is it solely that there hasn't been an agreement, or is there also a specific issue at stake with 12 vs 10 coaches on that route/service ?
cjmillsnun
Established Member
- Joined
- 13 Feb 2011
- Messages
- 3,275
It's no specific issue as far as I can see as 12 car Thameslink run DOO. It's just that ex SN drivers employed by GTR/Gatex have a different agreement to the Thameslink drivers.
I suspect that GatEx will be running 8 cars once the Piggies go until GTR have resolved this with ASLEF. It was reported on South Today that the train was 19m too long. To me doing the maths it is more like 10m too long (10*23 = 230 and 12*20=240)
Personally I believe that all passenger trains should have two safety trained personnel with route knowledge on board. The government and TOCs have other ideas.
Last edited:
I think it is something to do with ASLEF recently coming out saying they oppose extension of DOO services. So while they have agreed to 10 car DOO services that has not been extended to 12 car so ASLEF have not agreed to it.
Surely it's tenuous at best trying to argue that the replacement of one DOO service with another on a marginally longer train is 'an extension of DOO'
Last edited:
Depends your point of view. Is it tenuous to say if I can drive a LWB transit van on my current license surely I can drive a 7.5 tonner, its only a bit bigger...
If ASLEF have agreed to DOO up to 10 vehicles then up to 10 vehicles is what is the maximum that can be run.
As in this case, Drivers also refused to take 12 Car trains in service. To my knowledge not a single Driver was disciplined. There was indeed a period where ASLEF and management were are loggerheads over the 12 car introduction. Drivers were caught between a rock and a hard place, with mixed messages from both sides.
Ultimately the Driver is in charge of the train. If they believe that something is unsafe or against rules, policies etc then they can refuse to do it. Even if directly instructed to.
I guess it's all perception as you say. As an outsider looking in, it seems odd to me that ASLEF can accept a train in one part of a franchise but then disagree with it elsewhere. It makes them look fickle. Yes I know ex-southern and ex-FCC have different terms, but to the general public it just looks like whining to extract yet another allowance after already receiving above inflation pay rises.
Last edited:
LBSCR Times
Member
Booked a 12 car on diagrams.
Nothing to do with Control, so you're talking rubbish.
Anyway, there won't be an agreement as although GTR have met with ASLEF, they just said no to it. Full stop!
So, how you can come to an agreement when one party says no, then tell me!
ASLEF policy yes, but I'm not sure anyone has confirmed there is an agreement with the TOC detailing train length for DOO.
There may well be, but I haven't seen it confirmed.
birchesgreen
Established Member
Seems a bit like a Rev Awdry story about the nice new train who didn't want any smelly passengers on it.
Erm...this is the whole discussion on this thread :-?
This is the ASLEF that are completely opposed to further DOO despite patently having agreements in place for its use with many TOCs.
Does the current Southern/GatEx agreement explicitly state that DOO is only to be allowed on trains up to 10 car length? Can we have any link to that agreement that shows this?
GTR informed ASLEF on the 6th April that they would be running 12 car Class 387s from 9th April and... "We (GTR) will require all drivers who have been trained on using the new Class 387s to undertake these services when instructed to do so."
ASLEF, as is there right, have said they will ballot their driver members at Southern and Gatwick Express over this. Why ballot if there's already an agreement to not run more than 10 car DOO? No need for industrial action, just refuse to take the trains out.
It appears that one driver has taken it upon himself to start the industrial action ahead of the ballot.
ASLEF are saying that they are balloting members because they were not consulted about the 12 car introduction. They've made no statement that the operator are breaching an agreement. I wonder why?
Last edited:
- Status