Gatwick Express Industrial Relations

[neilm]

Are there any platform staff for the Gatwick services with dispatch duties?

Yes 24/7 - I do not think the drivers ever need to dispatch the trains themselves, which is why I am slightly confused about the dispute.

 

[Sunset route]

Yes 24/7 - I do not think the drivers ever need to dispatch the trains themselves, which is why I am slightly confused about the dispute.

Apart from the times when the driver uses the radio asking for permission to self dispatch as there are no platform staff about.

 

[LowLevel]

Although obviously that didn't apply to GatEx services before now as I believe one of the derogations from standards to run 442s DOO was that self dispatch was banned.

 

[neilm]

Apart from the times when the driver uses the radio asking for permission to self dispatch as there are no platform staff about.

Indeed but not possible with a 442 anyway. Buy I guess you could with a 387...

 

[tsr]

Are there any platform staff for the Gatwick services with dispatch duties?

Platform staff dispatch all trains at Gatwick and Victoria, but in an out-of-course event they would not be available at many of the stations in between.

 

[neilm]

Platform staff dispatch all trains at Gatwick and Victoria, but in an out-of-course event they would not be available at many of the stations in between.

But that already happens DOO on Gatex is not new.

So the dispute is just about GTR not talking to the union or drivers, did they not see this coming?

 

[Deepgreen]

Notwithstanding the emerging facts surrounding this case, GTR's history (as separate or combined entities) has not been inspiring regarding HR/IR issues - numerous threatened or actual strikes and a long-running crew shortage caused (on the face of it) by the lack of timely planning for the required number of staff. At least, that is how it looks to the average passenger who won't know (or care) about any possible nuances of the issues. GTR's continuing defence about how long it takes to train a driver (while true) doesn't wash as they repeatedly refuse to answer direct questions to them as to why recruitment wasn't put in train sooner, to ensure a seamless process without month upon month of crew shortages.

Anyway, this dispute (has it actually escalated beyond the 0530 train incident yet?) appears to be the result of a combination of out-of-date policy (according to, among others, Bald Rick's posts) and a seemingly complacent assumption by GTR that what happens on Thameslink can also happen on GatEx.

I write all this as someone not directly involved (apart from as a passenger who has experienced cancellations owing to the crew situation), and as someone who would far prefer to see guards retained on all trains.

It does also seem hard to avoid the assumption that the 0530 train was put out by GTR as a test case 12 car formation to establish the 'lie of the land' regarding 12 car DOO on GatEx, but perhaps I am being too conspiracy-theory gullible.

 

[Agent_c]

So DOO is a positive workflow change?

How?

I haven't said that it is. In fact, I'm opposed to it.

 

[Antman]

Platform staff dispatch all trains at Gatwick and Victoria, but in an out-of-course event they would not be available at many of the stations in between.

That's what I was going to mention, so why is there any need for a guard on the train?

 

[Tetchytyke]

So the dispute is just about GTR not talking to the union or drivers, did they not see this coming?

Diagramming the 12-car at 5.30am on a Saturday, when normally everything only has four cars and a lot of higher grades are not at work, was not a mistake.

I'll let others more cynical than I decide whether GoVia "saw this coming"...

 

[northwichcat]

Well what other sort of "progress" could be meant. Because if it was "progress" that was of benefit to the workforce then there would be no dispute.

Would the unions object to new services being introduced without guards and existing services keeping their guards? If so they would be objecting to progress as new driving jobs would be created but maybe not as many new jobs as the unions would like.

It seems with Northern the RMT want to keep banging on about guards being sacked even though there's been reports that senior management have said all existing guards will be retained and many new driving jobs and station jobs will be created.

 

[313103]

Would the unions object to new services being introduced without guards and existing services keeping their guards? If so they would be objecting to progress as new driving jobs would be created but maybe not as many new jobs as the unions would like.

It seems with Northern the RMT want to keep banging on about guards being sacked even though there's been reports that senior management have said all existing guards will be retained and many new driving jobs and station jobs will be created.

Companies are very clever when it comes to their displaced staff. They say they dont want to sack staff, but likewise they dont want them, so what they do they offer a sum of money that they know some members of staff will see as a way of getting out of the company.

The way as i mentioned earlier is that the companies dont really want to keep the guards, so they have to create meaningless and worthless roles for those displaced staff to slot into.

The point you make about drivers is totally irrelevant, as no one from the former Guards grade is guaranteed a job as a driver, infact the success rate of going from a guard to a driver is quite low, when compared to people off the street. So your point about a drivers role is a mute point.

Finally staff losing there jobs with no guarantee of getting another is indeed not progress for them, maybe good for the company as they reduce there staff costs, but on the whole not good for the majority of those displaced.

 

[BestWestern]

Would the unions object to new services being introduced without guards and existing services keeping their guards? If so they would be objecting to progress as new driving jobs would be created but maybe not as many new jobs as the unions would like.

It seems with Northern the RMT want to keep banging on about guards being sacked even though there's been reports that senior management have said all existing guards will be retained and many new driving jobs and station jobs will be created.

You misunderstand the issues; massively.

 

[island]

GatEx has changed, with more trains through to Brighton. These were traditionally operated by Southern, which do have guards.

As I understand it, Southern trains branded Gatwick Express that operate through to Brighton pick up a guard at Gatwick Airport and on the return journey the guard alights there.

The first part was more or less my point, but the second would have involved massive cumulative delays from the driver doing a walking check of a 12 car train at each stop.

There is only one stop.

 

[Deepgreen]

As I understand it, Southern trains branded Gatwick Express that operate through to Brighton pick up a guard at Gatwick Airport and on the return journey the guard alights there.

There is only one stop.

Not in the case of the Brighton workings or in the case of disruption, where extra stops may be added (e.g. Clapham Junction, East Croydon).

 

[notadriver]

You misunderstand the issues; massively.

I don't really think he does misunderstand the issues ....

 

[Tetchytyke]

I don't really think he does misunderstand the issues ....

No, I'd agree.

If the guards keep the same wage and perks (i.e. pension, increments, protected travel) but with a downgraded job, then there are no savings: you're still paying a guard's wage for a ticket examiner. If the guards do not keep the same wage and perks then there is a financial saving, but clearly the guards have been sacked.

So either the TOC won't save any cash or the guard's job isn't protected. You can't have both. The disingenuity from the TOCs is quite tiresome really.

 

[BestWestern]

I don't really think he does misunderstand the issues ....

Perhaps not...

 

[neilm]

Not in the case of the Brighton workings or in the case of disruption, where extra stops may be added (e.g. Clapham Junction, East Croydon).

Where there are platform staff, which goes back to my question does a Gatex Driver ever need to dispatch the train himself?

 

[northwichcat]

The point you make about drivers is totally irrelevant, as no one from the former Guards grade is guaranteed a job as a driver, infact the success rate of going from a guard to a driver is quite low, when compared to people off the street. So your point about a drivers role is a mute point.

You misunderstand the issues; massively.

I'm not saying the guards can retrain as drivers. I'm saying if there's a new guard-less service which creates new driver roles it can be considered progress as the railways are employing more people and providing more services. I realise the guards might disagree and prefer no new services over new DOO services because of fear of what may happen in the future.

With the RMT and Northern it sounds like they are still basing their press releases on the franchise consultation not the final agreement.

 

[Deepgreen]

Where there are platform staff, which goes back to my question does a Gatex Driver ever need to dispatch the train himself?

I was responding to your assertion that there is only one stop. Whether drivers ever actually self-dispatch is irrelevant, because the agreement that they won't for trains over 10 cars long has apparently been reached already. What needs to happen to amend that agreement (if anything) remains to be seen.

 

[neilm]

I was responding to your assertion that there is only one stop. Whether drivers ever actually self-dispatch is irrelevant, because the agreement that they won't for trains over 10 cars long has apparently been reached already. What needs to happen to amend that agreement (if anything) remains to be seen.

That is fine it is not very clear then as some replies seem to think that DOO is new to gatex, but bringing in the 387 will not change the process other than the trains are longer then.

 

[Deepgreen]

That is fine it is not very clear then as some replies seem to think that DOO is new to gatex, but bringing in the 387 will not change the process other than the trains are longer then.

No, I think it is clear throughout the thread that GatEx already has self-dispatch, and that the issue is one of train length - i.e. ASLEF have determined not to operate anything longer than 10 cars in DOO on GatEx, notwithstanding the existing Thameslink 12 car workings being DOO. Furthermore, their objection to any new 12 car DOO working may have a serious impact on class 700 introduction, as the 700/1s are indivisible 12 car units.

 

[neilm]

12 car DOO working may have a serious impact on class 700 introduction, as the 700/1s are indivisible 12 car units.

Interesting are any 12 car trains self despatched at wivesfield, hassocks or Preston park where there are no station staff at the moment?

 

[BestWestern]

I'm not saying the guards can retrain as drivers. I'm saying if there's a new guard-less service which creates new driver roles it can be considered progress as the railways are employing more people and providing more services. I realise the guards might disagree and prefer no new services over new DOO services because of fear of what may happen in the future.

With the RMT and Northern it sounds like they are still basing their press releases on the franchise consultation not the final agreement.

Aslef will not currently work any 'new DOO', anywhere on the network. Bringing in new services as DOO on existing routes is not just about making a decision not to have Guards on board, it requires extensive paperwork and potentially very expensive infrastructure modifications. You can't simply turn up one day with a new train and decide you won't have a Guard.

The concept of employing new staff on different terms to existing staff is something that any decent union will also resist. If the railways could get away with doing that we'd already have an army of staff across various grades being paid peanuts. And it isn't just money, it's terms & conditions as well. If the existing Drivers don't do DOO, you can't just recruit some new ones who will do it; thankfully it doesn't work like that.

 

[northwichcat]

Aslef will not currently work any 'new DOO', anywhere on the network. Bringing in new services as DOO on existing routes is not just about making a decision not to have Guards on board, it requires extensive paperwork and potentially very expensive infrastructure modifications. You can't simply turn up one day with a new train and decide you won't have a Guard.

You don't introduce a new service with a guard overnight either, it needs paperwork, rolling stock and potentially infrastructure changes to happen.

Aslef might want no new DOO but the unions don't run the rail network. Saying it won't happen because Aslef don't want it is like saying a minority party in a coalition government can block any policies the majority party may want - it doesn't happen, they have to be willing to compromise.

 

[Deepgreen]

You don't introduce a new service with a guard overnight either, it needs paperwork, rolling stock and potentially infrastructure changes to happen.

Aslef might want no new DOO but the unions don't run the rail network. Saying it won't happen because Aslef don't want it is like saying a minority party in a coalition government can block any policies the majority party may want - it doesn't happen, they have to be willing to compromise.

So, unless further agreement is reached, we might have a service where 'work to rule' is applied - meaning the risk of 12 car workings being refused or run empty. There may be ad hoc splitting of relevant 12 car formations (i.e. 387/2s) to permit passenger use, and/or there may also be a ban on rostering 12 car formations in the first place (hence the concern over the 700/1s). The 442s may yet have a fuller immediate future than thought!

 

[BestWestern]

You don't introduce a new service with a guard overnight either, it needs paperwork, rolling stock and potentially infrastructure changes to happen.

Aslef might want no new DOO but the unions don't run the rail network. Saying it won't happen because Aslef don't want it is like saying a minority party in a coalition government can block any policies the majority party may want - it doesn't happen, they have to be willing to compromise.

It would be incredibly difficult for any TOC to introduce new services, new staff and new conditions of employment over the heads of Aslef. They are a very powerful union and have the ability to bring parts of the railway to a grinding halt. If there was a 'beat the unions' strategy to be had, we'd have seen it before now. The railway remains a workplace in which the unions play a pivotal role in how things are done, like it or not. From the point of view of those who work within the industry, it is a very good thing indeed. Unless you're going to build a whole new railway and form a new company to run it, things are governed by what is already agreed.

 

[northwichcat]

It would be incredibly difficult for any TOC to introduce new services, new staff and new conditions of employment over the heads of Aslef.

I'm not saying that.

MD of TOC might approach Aslef rep saying "We have secured funding to provide a new service between x and y and to recruit 10 additional drivers. Unfortunately, there is no funding available to recruit 10 additional guards."

Aslef rep responds "No DOO."

In the end a compromise might be no DOO between the hours of x and y and only if the train formation doesn't exceed z and if a spare guard who signs the line is available than the service won't be DOO even between the DOO hours.

They are a very powerful union and have the ability to bring parts of the railway to a grinding halt.

I hope Aslef or any union don't bring the railway to a grinding halt, especially if it's over not employing more guards over people losing jobs. If they do the Conservatives will gain support for anti-Trade Union legislation and it will probably rule out the chance of Corbyn getting in to 10 Downing Street.

 

[Bald Rick]

Interesting are any 12 car trains self despatched at wivesfield, hassocks or Preston park where there are no station staff at the moment?

Yep, every morning around 0940 southbound (the latter two)