Southern DOO: ASLEF members vote 79.1% for revised deal

[DarloRich]

The dossier is available to view at the above link and by RMT standards is actually quite professional looking. Hopefully it can make a difference but I won't get my hopes up.....

A better bit of PR - now step up the communication with the media

 

[74A]

No it isn't! Either she fails utterly to understand the role of the guard (She is the Rail Minister!) OR she is deliberately miss speaking. I wonder which it is.

http://www.theargus.co.uk/news/1455...s_are_launching_a_war_on_passengers/?ref=fbpg

Im afraid she is correct. The guards primary role is to open and close the doors. Anything else is not essential otherwise you wouldn't have DOO operating.

 

[DarloRich]

Im afraid she is correct. The guards primary role is to open and close the doors. Anything else is not essential otherwise you wouldn't have DOO operating.

but that simply isn't true - and you know that - The guard has the responsibility for the safety of the train as his primary duty. In order to discharge that duty part of the job is to determine when it is safe to open or close doors. However that act is not the primary duty.

 

[74A]

but that simply isn't true - and you know that - The guard has the responsibility for the safety of the train as his primary duty. In order to discharge that duty part of the job is to determine when it is safe to open or close doors. However that act is not the primary duty.

Yes maybe but the reality is that trains from London to Oxford operate DOO and non-DOO. If a train can operate in DOO then logically the only thing a guard is provided for is to operate the doors

 

[BestWestern]

Yes maybe but the reality is that trains from London to Oxford operate DOO and non-DOO. If a train can operate in DOO then logically the only thing a guard is provided for is to operate the doors

No. Where a Guard is provided, they have full responsibility for all aspects of the safety of the train. This is why Guards are trained in Rules, PTS, route knowledge and so on. This is, indeed, one of the strands of the argument to retain them; the safety benefits are not limited just to doors.

 

[Robertj21a]

Isn't this back to where we started - about 210 pages ago ?

 

[BestWestern]

Isn't this back to where we started - about 210 pages ago ?

Yep!

 

[speedy_sticks]

Im afraid she is correct. The guards primary role is to open and close the doors. Anything else is not essential otherwise you wouldn't have DOO operating.

I am so pleased that these days wheelchairs and electric chairs can float in and out if trains defining the laws of physics and gravity!

 

[infobleep]

That's a bit more like it. I'm not a massive fan of the introduction (usually buzzwords such as 'greedy' feature) but the actual content beyond that seems really really good. That's a lot more like what I would expect to see in this argument. Now I wonder if they can have a load of them printed and start handing them out on station platforms particularly in the GTR area?

Not to mention giving them to journalists to read.

They said those in the rail industry know how safety critical the role is. One might wonder at times, if the RMT knew this based on some of their previous press releases.

Still let's hope this one isn't too late and can do some good.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The "Purely" crash referred to on page 10 sounds very similar to the Purley crash the same day! Who proof reads for them???

GTR? :Twisted:

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I am so pleased that these days wheelchairs and electric chairs can float in and out if trains defining the laws of physics and gravity!

You mean like the Daleks have been able to do since 1988?!

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

 

[sarahj]

I am so pleased that these days wheelchairs and electric chairs can float in and out if trains defining the laws of physics and gravity!

I know I said I would try and keep away, but Speedy, I just want to say, from what I've heard, I see a lot of Taxi's in your future.

To answer everyone else:

 

[cjmillsnun]

I know I said I would try and keep away, but Speedy, I just want to say, from what I've heard, I see a lot of Taxi's in your future.

To answer everyone else:

I wish you and all those on the coalface in this dispute all the best. Horton and his cronies can do one.

 

[LowLevel]

Yes maybe but the reality is that trains from London to Oxford operate DOO and non-DOO. If a train can operate in DOO then logically the only thing a guard is provided for is to operate the doors

Until the next time some evil scum parks a car on an AHB crossing or chucks a brick through the windscreen, or something happens that the driver can't cheerfully multi task through - closing the doors is one thing but only a part of an issue.

I have to work every day knowing my ultimate function on board could come about because someone I see more often than my family, who I'm often friends with and care about very deeply, is unconscious or dead at the front of the train. I have to run through this from time to time and consider how I might act.

Until you've had a train hit a tractor in a rural area with the nearest MOM 40 minutes away and BTP 20 minutes way you're not qualified to judge. This isn't just the Thameslink core they're on about.

Additionally if this stupid Perry woman would give a guarantee that a safety trained person, whether operating the doors or not, would be on every train as she seems to suggest, then I would imagine the dispute would be a step closer to ending.

I spend my working day attending to everything I can possibly imagine from leaking toilet tanks to suicidal people to safety of the line issues to holding folk in my arms when they've lost their way. To do many of these things I need to be in charge and accountable. We are there for our passengers in every possible way. I cannot accept that a better railway would result from us being 'broken' and cast aside. I'll fight to the end because I feel my services as a mandatory member of the train crew are worth it.

I hate that I have hate itself brewing in my soul but at the moment it's all that I feel towards those responsible. I truly hate them. I've never hated anyone before.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

https://www.rmt.org.uk/news/rmt-launches-new-dossier-exposing-safety-risks-of-doo/



The dossier is available to view at the above link and by RMT standards is actually quite professional looking. Hopefully it can make a difference but I won't get my hopes up.....

It was reading so well, until the wording of the final section that was shown in your stated extract which showed that the writer had been once again imbued with the phraseology that sadly has been the hallmark of their recent press releases.

 

[redbutton]

Until you've had a train hit a tractor in a rural area with the nearest MOM 40 minutes away and BTP 20 minutes way you're not qualified to judge. This isn't just the Thameslink core they're on about.

But that's just the thing. London-based politicians don't understand what the big deal is all about, because their only experience is as commuters on the urban railway that has been DOO for years. (E.g. Thameslink or Southern Metro routes.)

Beyond their own experience as lay commuters, they only know what the TOCs and McNutty tell them, which is that DOO is safe (though obviously we dispute that point) in the city, therefore it must be safe everywhere and there's no reason to continue wasting money on redundant guards.

That line of reasoning makes perfect sense, if (like the rail minister) you purposefully avoid or ignore the other side of the argument.

 

[455driver]

A better bit of PR - now step up the communication with the media

I have heard from an RMT official that the media wont print anything from the RMT.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

But that's just the thing. London-based politicians don't understand what the big deal is all about, because their only experience is as commuters on the urban railway that has been DOO for years. (E.g. Thameslink or Southern Metro routes.)

Beyond their own experience as lay commuters, they only know what the TOCs and McNutty tell them, which is that DOO is safe (though obviously we dispute that point) in the city, therefore it must be safe everywhere and there's no reason to continue wasting money on redundant guards.

That line of reasoning makes perfect sense, if (like the rail minister) you purposefully avoid or ignore the other side of the argument.

DOO is safe, its just that crew working is safer!

Oh and the guards are not being made redundant (that would cost money in redundancy), but its the guard role which is being replaced by this OBM/OBS role with the staff 'transferring' across to it.

We all know that this OBM/OBS role will only be a short term thing just as it was on Gatwick Express, where are they now?

At least most of the affected public are seeing through the rhetoric and lies and putting pressure on GTR/Government to get this sorted.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

Until the next time some evil scum parks a car on an AHB crossing or chucks a brick through the windscreen, or something happens that the driver can't cheerfully multi task through - closing the doors is one thing but only a part of an issue.

I have to work every day knowing my ultimate function on board could come about because someone I see more often than my family, who I'm often friends with and care about very deeply, is unconscious or dead at the front of the train. I have to run through this from time to time and consider how I might act.

Until you've had a train hit a tractor in a rural area with the nearest MOM 40 minutes away and BTP 20 minutes way you're not qualified to judge. This isn't just the Thameslink core they're on about.

Additionally if this stupid Perry woman would give a guarantee that a safety trained person, whether operating the doors or not, would be on every train as she seems to suggest, then I would imagine the dispute would be a step closer to ending.

I spend my working day attending to everything I can possibly imagine from leaking toilet tanks to suicidal people to safety of the line issues to holding folk in my arms when they've lost their way. To do many of these things I need to be in charge and accountable. We are there for our passengers in every possible way. I cannot accept that a better railway would result from us being 'broken' and cast aside. I'll fight to the end because I feel my services as a mandatory member of the train crew are worth it.

As a former guard I completely agree with this. Even the small minority of lazy guards who "hide in the back cab" would agree.

But that's just the thing. London-based politicians don't understand what the big deal is all about, because their only experience is as commuters on the urban railway that has been DOO for years. (E.g. Thameslink or Southern Metro routes.)

Beyond their own experience as lay commuters, they only know what the TOCs and McNutty tell them, which is that DOO is safe (though obviously we dispute that point) in the city, therefore it must be safe everywhere and there's no reason to continue wasting money on redundant guards.

Sadly this idea that "it works in London so it'll work everywhere else" is a common malaise amongst the Westminster/Whitehall tribe, not to mention most reporters working for national media outlets. And in many more areas than just railways....

 

[infobleep]

Is it my imagination or are less trains being cancelled in the early morning and morning peak compared to later in the day?

That shouldn't occur because staff work shift patterns to the so called "sickness" should affect different shifts just as bad on different days not just ones later in the day.

It may not be the case though as I've not studied the live departure boards continuously for multiple days.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

 

[craigybagel]

More interesting PR developments this morning

http://www.brightonandhovenews.org/2016/06/15/is-this-the-document-that-proves-southern-banned-overtime/

A letter from a senior Southern manager telling supervisors not to authorise rest day working appears to prove claims that staff shortages are being exacerbated by a ban on overtime.

An angry member of staff approached Brighton and Hove News after Govia denied any overtime ban following claims made in a blog post by Sussex-based writer Dave Boyle based on discussions with station staff.

He said that although the ban had now been lifted, it had been put in place following the first of three strikes this spring by RMT members over safety concerns around the move to driver-only trains and the reworking of the conductor’s role.

And he provided this photograph of a printed email from Southern’s head of conductors and on-board Piero McCarthy, annotated by a Southern manager making it clear that rest day working (RDW) was to be banned.

The note says: “no RDW A/R only for no cover”. A/R stands for as required, which is a standard staffing measure whereby a bank of staff are rostered on to be on standby.

With recent staff shortages, standby staff have routinely been called into action to cover gaps, so a shortage of as required crew members has a significant knock-on effect on services.

In addition, staff have been banned from swapping shifts, which is commonly done to allow people to work around outside commitments such as childcare or be able to get to and from work in the early hours of the morning, and Southern has also cancelled the free transport passes given to staff and their families.

The member of staff said: “Traditionally on the railways you have a situation that there have always been people coming in on an as required basis so that if things go wrong they have sufficient crew available to cope.

“Over the last three years now the probability of anyone coming in remaining as required is virtually zero – they have been using us to fill vacancies through lack of recruitment.

“A ban on rest day working for as required is effectively a ban on overtime in order to cover staff shortages. This has since been rescinded but the fact is that GTR is denying that it ever happened.

They’re sheltered from any fines because of the contract they have with the government, which pays them a flat fee. And since February, the government’s given them an extra 9,000 trains they can cancel.

“They have just had two complete days of talks at ACAS, during which the RMT put forward a seven point plan and the company refused point blank to give consideration to any of those points.

“They have stated from the start that this is going to happen. The point here is that the action is over the extension to driver only operation and the implications that has for the doing away of guards and replacing them with a watered down version which has nothing to do with passenger safety.”

Another member of Southern staff who spoke to Brighton and Hove News on strict condition of anonymity, confirmed the overtime ban, adding: “I think it was quietly bought back in so they could cover some of the vast amount of cancellations. But it’s clearly not working.

“Before the industrial action conductors got an enhanced payment as a thank you for working their day off. This isn’t the case anymore. Just flat money.”

On Monday, a spokesman for GTR, which runs Southern services, said the claim was completely untrue. However, this morning the @SouthernRailUK Twitter account admitted that a ban had been in place but had now been lifted.

 

[TheEdge]

Until the next time some evil scum parks a car on an AHB crossing or chucks a brick through the windscreen, or something happens that the driver can't cheerfully multi task through - closing the doors is one thing but only a part of an issue.

I have to work every day knowing my ultimate function on board could come about because someone I see more often than my family, who I'm often friends with and care about very deeply, is unconscious or dead at the front of the train. I have to run through this from time to time and consider how I might act.

Until you've had a train hit a tractor in a rural area with the nearest MOM 40 minutes away and BTP 20 minutes way you're not qualified to judge. This isn't just the Thameslink core they're on about.

Additionally if this stupid Perry woman would give a guarantee that a safety trained person, whether operating the doors or not, would be on every train as she seems to suggest, then I would imagine the dispute would be a step closer to ending.

I spend my working day attending to everything I can possibly imagine from leaking toilet tanks to suicidal people to safety of the line issues to holding folk in my arms when they've lost their way. To do many of these things I need to be in charge and accountable. We are there for our passengers in every possible way. I cannot accept that a better railway would result from us being 'broken' and cast aside. I'll fight to the end because I feel my services as a mandatory member of the train crew are worth it.

I hate that I have hate itself brewing in my soul but at the moment it's all that I feel towards those responsible. I truly hate them. I've never hated anyone before.

This a million times over. There is so much more to our role than these cretins understand or want to admit. Its not often that we have to use that knowledge in those situations but those are the moments we earn our money and prove our worth.

One assumes we will see nothing until a single manned Southern service in rural Sussex ploughs into a tractor, then we can see what Horton, Crowther and Perry have to say.

 

[TheEdge]

More interesting PR developments this morning

http://www.brightonandhovenews.org/2016/06/15/is-this-the-document-that-proves-southern-banned-overtime/

A much higher def image of the letter than never existed...

 

[DarloRich]

A much higher def image of the letter than never existed...

but that letter doesn't exist. Surely not another untruth? Anyone would think there was a determined disinformation campaign by both the TOC and government
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I have heard from an RMT official that the media wont print anything from the RMT.

They will but only the bits they want. They want, and the union seem happy to provide, a ranting soundbite based on class warfare. That's why the union need to get smarter in communicating with them and only letting them have agreed soundbites couched in less "old fashioned" terms .

 

[speedy_sticks]

Apparently they will be offered redundancy if they don't wsnt the OBS position?

If the redundancy money reflected the long term service of a guard, they would be stupid not to accept it!

We all know they're will be a lessor number of OBS staff compared to guards.

Nobody told the guard or Crawley station that I Ws getting off there when I left Clapham Junction, so after a passanger saw a guard ON THE PLATFORM they motioned him to get me off.

Now if it was an OBS I would be screwed. How would they know that I needed to get off, how would I know that there was an OBS ob my train?

I did commit the crime of not pre booking.

I have heard from an RMT official that the media wont print anything from the RMT.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


DOO is safe, its just that crew working is safer!

Oh and the guards are not being made redundant (that would cost money in redundancy), but its the guard role which is being replaced by this OBM/OBS role with the staff 'transferring' across to it.

We all know that this OBM/OBS role will only be a short term thing just as it was on Gatwick Express, where are they now?

At least most of the affected public are seeing through the rhetoric and lies and putting pressure on GTR/Government to get this sorted.

 

[ungreat]

Until the next time some evil scum parks a car on an AHB crossing or chucks a brick through the windscreen, or something happens that the driver can't cheerfully multi task through - closing the doors is one thing but only a part of an issue.

I have to work every day knowing my ultimate function on board could come about because someone I see more often than my family, who I'm often friends with and care about very deeply, is unconscious or dead at the front of the train. I have to run through this from time to time and consider how I might act.

Until you've had a train hit a tractor in a rural area with the nearest MOM 40 minutes away and BTP 20 minutes way you're not qualified to judge. This isn't just the Thameslink core they're on about.

Additionally if this stupid Perry woman would give a guarantee that a safety trained person, whether operating the doors or not, would be on every train as she seems to suggest, then I would imagine the dispute would be a step closer to ending.

I spend my working day attending to everything I can possibly imagine from leaking toilet tanks to suicidal people to safety of the line issues to holding folk in my arms when they've lost their way. To do many of these things I need to be in charge and accountable. We are there for our passengers in every possible way. I cannot accept that a better railway would result from us being 'broken' and cast aside. I'll fight to the end because I feel my services as a mandatory member of the train crew are worth it.

I hate that I have hate itself brewing in my soul but at the moment it's all that I feel towards those responsible. I truly hate them. I've never hated anyone before.

This. Spot on mate

 

[Deepgreen]

One of Southern's other fabrications is their repeated claim on their web site home page message that every cancelled train costs them a penalty. No - as I understand it their fixed fee contract precludes this. An apparent attempt to make the public believe that they would naturally want to avoid cancellations on commercial grounds, rather than possibly accept them in order to try to alienate the crews from the public.

 

[JamesTT]

Can anyone hazard a sensible guess what RMT's action plan might have been?

 

[ComUtoR]

Apparently they will be offered redundancy if they don't wsnt the OBS position?

If the redundancy money reflected the long term service of a guard, they would be stupid not to accept it!

I'm pretty sure that there is no redundancy. It is a mass dismissal and re-employment offer. There is a letter to the insolvency service up the thread somewhere. If it was redundancy and/or re-employment then it would be slightly different.

Happy to be corrected but I've heard or seen nothing mentioning any redundancy payments. Its accept or dole queue.

 

[JamesTT]

One of Southern's other fabrications is their repeated claim on their web site home page message that every cancelled train costs them a penalty. No - as I understand it their fixed fee contract precludes this. An apparent attempt to make the public believe that they would naturally want to avoid cancellations on commercial grounds, rather than possibly accept them in order to try to alienate the crews from the public.

What about the delay repay fees?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I'm pretty sure that there is no redundancy. It is a mass dismissal and re-employment offer. There is a letter to the insolvency service up the thread somewhere. If it was redundancy and/or re-employment then it would be slightly different.

Happy to be corrected but I've heard or seen nothing mentioning any redundancy payments. Its accept or dole queue.

Can someone with proper knowledge of employment law explain the legality of this plan of attack by Southern

 

[ainsworth74]

I have heard from an RMT official that the media wont print anything from the RMT.

With the quality that some of their press releases I almost don't blame them for not publishing it! It might actually do more harm than good to get them to a wider audience!

 

[Deepgreen]

What about the delay repay fees?

Relatively low cost, even if one cancelled train does lead to a delay of more than 30 minutes, which won't always be the case.

 

[74A]

A much higher def image of the letter than never existed...

The only reference to overtime in the letter is a hand written bit at the top. The letter itself only refers to Guards swapping booking sundays off etc.

The hand written bit says :- No RDW for a/r only for no cover. Which means they will give out overtime to cover open turns but not to bring someone in on the off chance they may be needed.