Southern DOO: ASLEF members vote 79.1% for revised deal

[Dave1987]

So why do we have lots of DOO lines, if passengers are supposedly being successfully mobilised by the unions?

Because unfortunately ASLEF accepted it all those years ago. I'm a driver who works both DOO and guarded trains. I dread the day when I've got upwards of a 1000 people on my train and I need to leave the train for some reason. The risk of people detraining themselves and walking down the track of their own accord is very high as in the modern world. I love having a guard on my train. Knowing there is another safety critical member of staff on my train means when s**t happens I can concentrate on what I need to do and not worry about passengers as the guard will deal with them, call control, and contact the signaller if I need them to. I can concentrate on what I need to do.

 

[speedy_sticks]

So why do we have lots of DOO lines, if passengers are supposedly being successfully mobilised by the unions?

I can't understand your utter lack of knowledge.

DOO lines are mostly through London where stations are well staffed and get extra funding from TfL to do so.

Also DOO lines are mostly run along lines where there is a main line.

Try being in a wheelchair before commenting on DOO expansion.

 

[AlterEgo]

Unions aren't claiming credit for passengers' opposition to this? As for why there are more DOO lines which transitioned smoothly, it's probably because very few have converted in recent times (post privatisation where passenger numbers have been as high as they have) as cack-handedly as Southern

Precisely. The point I was making was that, contrary to Dave1987's claims, the union isn't mobilising passengers.

And it's correct to say Southern are doing it cackhandedly. This reinforces my point that passengers don't have a general opposition to DOO (or at least, not enough to draw them to dissent). It's simply that Southern haven't handled this well, have annoyed the staff, and are running a reduced service. And therefore the good commuters of Sussex are having problems getting to work.

 

[ComUtoR]

Knowing there is another safety critical member of staff on my train means when s**t happens I can concentrate on what I need to do and not worry about passengers as the guard will deal with them, call control, and contact the signaller if I need them to. I can concentrate on what I need to do.

Sooooooo you don't care who opens or closes the doors. Good, neither do I. I couldn't give a flying **** about door operation but I do care about the passengers on my train and the value of another set of hands I can trust implicitly to do their job (and get me a kit kat and a free cuppa) when anything happens. Their value is so much more than ding ding and checking tickets.

 

[AlterEgo]

I can't understand your utter lack of knowledge.

DOO lines are mostly through London where stations are well staffed and get extra funding from TfL to do so.

Also DOO lines are mostly run along lines where there is a main line.

Try being in a wheelchair before commenting on DOO expansion.

I know exactly why there are DOO lines and where they are - my question was asking rail staff why they think we have so many, if passengers hate them so much?

Read the NPS trends and you'll see passengers don't much believe their safety is affected on DOO trains.

I'm not necessarily claiming they're as safe as guarded trains - but I'm talking about the perception of safety - among millions of people, not train enthusiasts or rail staff.

 

[Dave1987]

Precisely. The point I was making was that, contrary to Dave1987's claims, the union isn't mobilising passengers.

And it's correct to say Southern are doing it cackhandedly. This reinforces my point that passengers don't have a general opposition to DOO (or at least, not enough to draw them to dissent). It's simply that Southern haven't handled this well, have annoyed the staff, and are running a reduced service. And therefore the good commuters of Sussex are having problems getting to work.

Prey tell where exactly I said the union was mobilising passengers?

 

[ComUtoR]

Read the NPS trends and you'll see passengers don't much believe their safety is affected on DOO trains.

Passengers care about very little. Fare prices, punctuality, and a seat.

I've had passengers telling me that they are happy to sit in the dark, locked carriage because they just want to get home. I've had passengers sit next to a smashed window, begging me not to cancel the train.

They don't care about the technicalities of running a service; that's my job.

 

[AlterEgo]

Prey tell where exactly I said the union was mobilising passengers?

I thought it was implied in post 4139. Apologies if I misread.

Nonetheless, my point stands - the RMT's one-dimensional campaign is very unlikely to be successful in the circumstances. A poisonous anti-Union government, hard minds at the DfT, and SN's hand being forced on the matter.

I repeat that consistent passenger survey trends show that passengers don't make the link between their safety and (an often invisible, if non-commercial) guard.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Passengers care about very little. Fare prices, punctuality, and a seat.

Indeed.

 

[ComUtoR]

I repeat that consistent passenger survey trends show that passengers don't make the link between their safety and (an often invisible, if non-commercial) guard.

I said something relevant.

Indeed.

That is why WE stick up for them and protect the railway quite vociferously. I truly fear the day where nobody is left to fight for the passengers and the safety of the railway.

 

[AlterEgo]

That is why WE stick up for them and protect the railway quite vociferously. I truly fear the day where nobody is left to fight for the passengers and the safety of the railway.

But the RMT is a maligned voice I'm afraid. I salute your indefatigability.

 

[physics34]

I'm not sure I follow your line about money taken "deserving more members of staff". Could you elaborate?

basically the fares raised from the 1000 or so on the train.......

that amount of money taken for that one journey.......(on average)....

in total the passengers pay enough to have at a least another member of safety staff/customer service staff on board.

The company can afford it.

 

[AlterEgo]

basically the fares raised from the 1000 or so on the train.......

that amount of money taken for that one journey.......(on average)....

in total the passengers pay enough to have at a least another member of safety staff/customer service staff on board.

The company can afford it.

Just because a company can afford something doesn't mean they should provide it.

People who live in the Southern network area and who commute into London are likely to understand this better than most. They're affluent and commercially-aware - and a lot of them will be key business decision makers themselves.

The key is to emphasise the presence of the guard and to understand why many passengers don't say they feel less safe without on on board.

 

[Robertj21a]

basically the fares raised from the 1000 or so on the train.......

that amount of money taken for that one journey.......(on average)....

in total the passengers pay enough to have at a least another member of safety staff/customer service staff on board.

The company can afford it.

Why should the company pay out more than was agreed ? The company worked out the costings given the facts that applied at the time. If you were to now change the conditions then they would simply come up with revised figures.

 

[infobleep]

Just because a company can afford something doesn't mean they should provide it.

People who live in the Southern network area and who commute into London are likely to understand this better than most. They're affluent and commercially-aware - and a lot of them will be key business decision makers themselves.

The key is to emphasise the presence of the guard and to understand why many passengers don't say they feel less safe without on on board.

I think you'll find most won't make key decisions and not everyone can be a manager with such power and not everyone wants to be.

Some enjoy doing the practical coalface type work and leave the managing to others.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

 

[physics34]

Why should the company pay out more than was agreed ? The company worked out the costings given the facts that applied at the time. If you were to now change the conditions then they would simply come up with revised figures.

im not blaming the company on this and the contract they signed, im just pointing out that there is money there to pay for on board staff.

 

[Robertj21a]

im not blaming the company on this and the contract they signed, im just pointing out that there is money there to pay for on board staff.

So where is this supposed money if it's not part of the existing profit needed by the company ?

 

[AlterEgo]

I think you'll find most won't make key decisions and not everyone can be a manager with such power and not everyone wants to be.

Some enjoy doing the practical coalface type work and leave the managing to others.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

As a *general demographic* I stand by my comment. Sussex and Surrey are very affluent parts of England. Most commuters in those regions (who will be engaged, politically aware and commercially aware) will probably be Conservative voters, and many of them will be at least middle management.

 

[infobleep]

As a *general demographic* I stand by my comment. Sussex and Surrey are very affluent parts of England. Most commuters in those regions (who will be engaged, politically aware and commercially aware) will probably be Conservative voters, and many of them will be at least middle management.

I disagree unless you have evidence to back this up. It is impossible for most people on the train to be middle management. All the people below them also have to travel and they don't all live in London either.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

 

[AlterEgo]

I disagree unless you have evidence to back this up. It is impossible for most people on the train to be middle management. All the people below them also have to travel and they don't all live in London either.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

You should try travelling on a train in Surrey or Sussex (or even Buckinghamshire!) during peak hours. I can assure you the demographic is overwhelmingly middle class, overwhelmingly people who are middle management or above, and they mostly commute from Tory constituencies.

It is not affordable to be on £18-20,000 a year and be paying £4,500 for a season ticket into work. Not many people do this.

Next time you see the passengers bitching about Southern on the news, pay attention to the sort of people they interview.

 

[ExRes]

As a *general demographic* I stand by my comment. Sussex and Surrey are very affluent parts of England. Most commuters in those regions (who will be engaged, politically aware and commercially aware) will probably be Conservative voters, and many of them will be at least middle management.

Sorry but this a sweeping generalisation which is absolute guff, everybody may like to call themselves 'manager' these days but they simply are not

I lived on the 'affluent' Sussex/Surrey border for over 50 years and commuted to London for almost 20 of them, many of my fellow commuters were travelling to London area jobs in order to pay their mortgages on very ordinary houses which were overvalued because of that so called affluence

 

[AlterEgo]

Sorry but this a sweeping generalisation which is absolute guff, everybody may like to call themselves 'manager' these days but they simply are not

I lived on the 'affluent' Sussex/Surrey border for over 50 years and commuted to London for almost 20 of them, many of my fellow commuters were travelling to London area jobs in order to pay their mortgages on very ordinary houses which were overvalued because of that so called affluence

I'm talking about middle management - where people start making business decisions - in the context of the dispute.

My point is, you will find it difficult to mobilise passengers against a train company fighting a Tory government where:

-those passengers are mostly Tory voters
-those passengers will be commercially and politically aware
-those passengers will be mostly university educated


Sure, most people live in ordinary houses but I'm extrapolating sets of values, living standards and attitudes from what is known about the areas we're talking about.

I research audiences for a living (yes, middle management!) and it's interesting what you can find out about regional variations.

 

[infobleep]

I'm talking about middle management - where people start making business decisions - in the context of the dispute.

My point is, you will find it difficult to mobilise passengers against a train company fighting a Tory government where:

-those passengers are mostly Tory voters
-those passengers will be commercially and politically aware
-those passengers will be mostly university educated


Sure, most people live in ordinary houses but I'm extrapolating sets of values, living standards and attitudes from what is known about the areas we're talking about.

I research audiences for a living (yes, middle management!) and it's interesting what you can find out about regional variations.

So where do all the people not in middle management live?

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

 

[AlterEgo]

So where do all the people not in middle management live?

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

They live more locally to work (or they work more locally to home, really) one would assume. People in entry level jobs tend to have to live closer to work because they can't afford the transport. This is just common sense.

There are still quite a few people who commute in from the counties who aren't sort of middle management types, but that isn't the *general trend*.

As I said earlier, do watch the news next time they get half a dozen passengers bitching about Southern and you'll get a feel for things.

I think this point has been done to death; it's a side issue relating to the RMT's failure to engage anyone beyond its own horizons - something which is getting more pronounced thanks to:

a) social change
b) the inertia of the union's hierarchy and culture

I fear this point might be lost on some members.

 

[infobleep]

They live more locally to work (or they work more locally to home, really) one would assume. People in entry level jobs tend to have to live closer to work because they can't afford the transport. This is just common sense.

There are still quite a few people who commute in from the counties who aren't sort of middle management types, but that isn't the *general trend*.

As I said earlier, do watch the news next time they get half a dozen passengers bitching about Southern and you'll get a feel for things.

I think this point has been done to death; it's a side issue relating to the RMT's failure to engage anyone beyond its own horizons - something which is getting more pronounced thanks to:

a) social change
b) the inertia of the union's hierarchy and culture

I fear this point might be lost on some members.

I agree the RMT may not be good at always engaging beyond their own outlook but in this case I agree with having a guard on the train.

Can people afford to live close to their work place in London?

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

 

[AlterEgo]

I agree the RMT may not be good at always engaging beyond their own outlook but in this case I agree with having a guard on the train.

Can people afford to live close to their work place in London?

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

I think most people can appreciate the point I am trying to make (even if they don't agree) and I've taken enough forum space to satisfy myself I've articulated my point in full.

Back to talking about DOO.

 

[Haig paxton]

No more DOO.

 

[LBSCR Times]

No more DOO.

Why not?

 

[Dave1987]

This thread just goes round and round in circles! LBSCR Times read the just the last three pages and you will see perfectly good reasons why not!

 

[Flamingo]

Back to talking about DOO.

What's the point? Everything that can be said has been. I certainly have not seen any arguements from the pro-DOO people that stand up to basic scrutiny, and they are still of the mindset that anything said against DOO is just dinosaur unions protecting jobs.

There are occasional the likes of XDM who are obviously just trying to protect their own job working as PA for Charles Horton.

And the people directly affected at Southern have bern bullied by management into not posting.

 

[LBSCR Times]

F

This thread just goes round and round in circles! LBSCR Times read the just the last three pages and you will see perfectly good reasons why not!

I've posted comments earlier in the thread....
Having been involved with DOO since BR days, then my opinions won't count for anything anyway!