Southern DOO: ASLEF members vote 79.1% for revised deal

[AlterEgo]

There should be no incentive to cut corners.

But we already have Delay Repay, delay attribution, and the like. Do you think that people cut corners because these schemes exist?

 

[highdyke]

There should be no incentive to cut corners.

Okay, let's deduct the pay then. Unions will love that!

 

[yorkie]

There should be no incentive to cut corners.

That's not being suggested

 

[JamesTT]

Today: Train pulls into station, TOC has ensured that staffing levels are maintained so that all turns can be covered, including adequate spare and standby cover (yes, ok, clearly not the case at Southern, but that's nothing to do with DOO), so it's unlikely that there'll be no guard to take it forward in all but the most severe disruption.

After OBS: Staffing levels decline, spare turns are either not covered or dispensed with altogether, even running turns go uncovered because there's no incentive to fill vacancies to ensure that they can be covered. Doesn't stop the train running, but it's far more likely than in today's situation that your chap needing assistance will be left behind.

Please explain how the person requiring assistance will be worse off than they are now?.

 

[Tomnick]

Please explain how the person requiring assistance will be worse of than they are now?.

Because, with no incentive to maintain staffing levels and provide a second member of staff on every train, I'm absolutely certain that spare and standby cover will all but disappear, vacancies will be left unfilled, and, over time, more and more trains will indeed run without the second member of staff. Leaving aside Southern's gross mismanagement, it's not all that common for trains to be cancelled because there's no guard, exactly because there's adequate spare cover to deal with most things that a typical day throws at the job.

 

[Mintona]

But we already have Delay Repay, delay attribution, and the like. Do you think that people cut corners because these schemes exist?

It is incredibly rare that any delay comes down to an individual driver or guard.

 

[AlterEgo]

It is incredibly rare that any delay comes down to an individual driver or guard.

Indeed it is. I was speaking more broadly from an operations perspective.

 

[ComUtoR]

That's not being suggested

Not directly no. However; providing performance related targets leads to people cutting corners to make a fast buck. A few mph over the speed limit here and shave a few seconds off dwell time there. Staff will cut corners to meet performance targets; especially when there is a cash incentive at the end.

What happens when another service holds me at a junction signal ? do I lose my months performance pay ? It would be a nightmare to manage, almost impossible.

Performance related pay causes internal problems too as staff see some as being unfair. Again, corners get cut as people push the system to the limit and beyond as well as finding ways to scam the system.

The timetable is also horribly broken and I drive some routes where it is impossible to meet the timetable.

The problem with performance is that the pressure it puts on a Driver IS detrimental and unsafe. Drivers have incidents because they are going to miss their connection and rush through dispatch processes and Drivers hide incident because they have the Sword of Damocles hanging over them. They chance it. Reset and Go happens due to this kind of situation. Look at the WCR problems. There is an issue where performance is taking precedent over safety. There is pressure to keep the service running at any cost.

So no, maybe not directly suggesting cutting corners but certainly a result of performance targets.

 

[bramling]

To be honest I'd introduce performance related pay too.

No way.

Where I am there are certain management grades on various forms of PRP, or the other method is having a scorecard where they get performance managed if their scorecard isn't green.

It's okay in principle, but leads to three difficulties:

1) Safety comes first except when the scorecard comes first. Yes, people will do things they wouldn't otherwise do when money or kudos is involved. It's not appropriate to post details, but I can think of a *very* serious near-miss which basically resulted from someone not wanting their morning's performance to be blemished by a failed train.

2) Unless the measures used are completely unable to be abused (which is difficult to achieve), sooner or later books will end up being cooked. It starts with the odd figure, time or whatever being flexed, and ends up with the everything being geared round the performance measurement system.

3) The reality of the railway is that some events are completely beyond your control as an operator. How do you design a fair performance regime which allows for this?

 

[highdyke]

Everyone gets allocated delay codes and it's been going on for 20 years, real money changes hands.

Every minute within reason must be accounted for. As a signaller you must avoid OC and OB codes in particular, although there are others. You will get hauled-up getting too many.

At one place we made a thing to keep those down to the minimum, with the least delay per month per person. Despite a very congested railway, best in the area by far. No incentive other than we were all enthusiasts.

http://nrodwiki.rockshore.net/index.php/Delay_Attribution_Guide

No safety was put at risk, some tight regulating at times, which didn't pay off if the driver was sluggish or the next place along did something a bit mean. I guess from a drivers point of view, they might be tempted to approach a signal or station too fast, but I wouldn't include that sort of thing in any scheme like that, or anything where you could risk safety. Just purely stuff to weed out poor decision making or crappy staff in annual performance reviews.

Anyway, back to DOO.

 

[Tomnick]

That sort of thing though, measuring performance to delay minutes, is much more relevant to the Signalman's role than the Driver's. One box on my old patch was particularly competitive in that respect, exactly as you describe. In practice, though, the fear of an O-code (more the consequences from a manager whose "delay minute budget" was being hammered) seemed to discourage any sort of creative regulation - everything was more likely to simply run in booked order, doing nothing to help recover from disruption and certainly not reducing the overall delay, but crucially minimising the risk of getting lumbered with an O-code.

The majority of TG and TH codes (drivers and guards respectively), from my own observations at least, are down to turns being uncovered, that sort of thing, rather than individuals causing delays themselves. The biggest incidents that were dobbed to indivuduals related to operating incidents, SPADs and other errors on the driver's part - already thoroughly dealt with internally, and certainly not appropriate for any sort of performance-related pay.

 

[highdyke]

Or anything from a signallers point of view I would say in a failure situation or handling engineering work, dealing with people, where you are reliant on procedures without protection from interlocking. Although we all know some signallers are good at keeping delay to a min and others are not so good....

The sort of thing that used to annoy me with drivers was dawdling out of the mess room at the last minute (not always down to them personally as they could be on a PNB). Then they would depart 30 seconds- 1 min late and bugger up my regulating, which would culminate in a freight driver coming on the phone, giving me "what for" over why I looped him rather than kept him running! That's the sort of thing I'd like to see stopped. I'm sure it annoys them when they approach a red, then it goes to green for no reason! That said, some of them don't understand overlaps, and are convinced they are being held outside stations for no reason.

 

[Tomnick]

Or anything from a signallers point of view I would say in a failure situation or handling engineering work, dealing with people, where you are reliant on procedures without protection from interlocking. Although we all know some signallers are good at keeping delay to a min and others are not so good....

How do you objectively evaluate their performance in that sort of situation, though? Someone might come up against a few 'straightforward' failure situations, muddle their way through them and somehow keep the job going without incident - and get a nice bonus for it. Another might just have one absolute job-stopper, handle it really well and do everything that they can to keep things moving, but get hammered because it caused a lot more delay than the other chap's incidents (all of them put together). I'd be pretty displeased if I missed out on extra pay just because I was lucky enough to avoid severe disruption!

The sort of thing that used to annoy me with drivers was dawdling out of the mess room at the last minute (not always down to them personally as they could be on a PNB). Then they would depart 30 seconds- 1 min late and bugger up my regulating, which would culminate in a freight driver coming on the phone, giving me "what for" over why I looped him rather than kept him running! That's the sort of thing I'd like to see stopped. I'm sure it annoys them when they approach a red, then it goes to green for no reason! That said, some of them don't understand overlaps, and are convinced they are being held outside stations for no reason.

I don't disagree (that, and drivers losing time in section for no apparent reason!), but again, how would you go about this? They get away with it because, obviously, a one minute delay won't be investigated (or indeed because there was a good reason for it!).

 

[ComUtoR]

The sort of thing that used to annoy me with drivers was dawdling out of the mess room at the last minute (not always down to them personally as they could be on a PNB). Then they would depart 30 seconds- 1 min late and bugger up my regulating, which would culminate in a freight driver coming on the phone, giving me "what for" over why I looped him rather than kept him running! That's the sort of thing I'd like to see stopped. I'm sure it annoys them when they approach a red, then it goes to green for no reason! That said, some of them don't understand overlaps, and are convinced they are being held outside stations for no reason.

This is why such a them and us culture exists. Nobody really understands each others jobs. I could wax lyrical about Signaller but I chose not to; unless for fun.

If a Driver doesn't understand overlaps then they don't pass the rules course as its part of a pass/fail section The problem I have found is that we are shown very basic information about signals and overlaps etc. Then the real world hits and nothing you have been taught relates to what is happening due to interlocking, restrictive overlaps, blocking regulations, approach control, etc etc.

I have also learnt that sectional timings also do not relate to any real world driving. We have a few timing points where you will NEVER make it. My schedule is what I drive to. I am late/early based on stations rather than TRUST points.

If I get held at a Red, would I still get performance pay ?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

They get away with it because, obviously, a one minute delay won't be investigated (or indeed because there was a good reason for it!).

We get many delay reports for a single minute.

 

[Tomnick]

We get many delay reports for a single minute.

Really?! That must keep the TDA folk busy. Anything below three minutes just gets dumped into a sub-threshold pot in our area.

 

[highdyke]

How do you objectively evaluate their performance in that sort of situation, though? Someone might come up against a few 'straightforward' failure situations, muddle their way through them and somehow keep the job going without incident - and get a nice bonus for it. Another might just have one absolute job-stopper, handle it really well and do everything that they can to keep things moving, but get hammered because it caused a lot more delay than the other chap's incidents (all of them put together). I'd be pretty displeased if I missed out on extra pay just because I was lucky enough to avoid severe disruption!

Oh I don't think you can very easily, if at all. It's all a game a chance anyway, because it depends on the location and time of day. It's all those minutes on top you get from certain services in certain places en-route. Always makes me cringe when certain TOCs get hauled-over in the press, when much is dependent on what's on the ground and the services they are running. To be fair Southern are at a disadvantage here. Intensive railway, complex flat junctions, dwell time critical, not especially self-contained, some of the world's most invensive heavy rail services through platforms and junctions that can barely cope, especially when parts of layout are ripped out.

It has to be non-safety related cut-and-dry stuff: Poor regulating, not doing ticket checks without reason, dawdling out of mess rooms late etc.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

This is why such a them and us culture exists. Nobody really understands each others jobs. I could wax lyrical about Signaller but I chose not to; unless for fun.

Oh I don't mind, some signallers are clueless. We had one bloke that kept putting the road back on people and really didn't see it as a problem. I've sat in many cabs and listened to some great points and some utter crap as well, thinking if only you knew!

 

[ComUtoR]

Really?! That must keep the TDA folk busy. Anything below three minutes just gets dumped into a sub-threshold pot in our area.

Not all TOC's are the same and the other TOC I drive for has a 3 minute threshold.

There is also a difference between a delay minute and the cumulative minute. I've seen reports of 1000 delay minutes being attributed to a single train yet the Drivers report only asked about a few minutes. Your right in some respects but we can, and do, get report requests for a single minute.

I would agree that from my perspective, late running means pretty much nothing when its a few minutes. When it was PPM there is a 5min window anyway. RTR is bringing a new approach to delays but TRUST is so out of date that we need a new and better system to track the trains in such detail.

I've been 20+ and never seen a report but I can get a report for a single minutes delay from the sidings (which is signaller controlled)

I don't envy the attribution teams.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

We had one bloke that kept putting the road back on people and really didn't see it as a problem.

Keeping on topic. I'm DOO mostly and I've had many signals go back. Some of the more scary ones I've come off track and cancelled the rest of my duty. When we are out there with just ourselves we make different decisions. A cuppa from a second member of staff and someone to talk it out with quickly can make a difference to my day. Just another thing I respect Guards for.

 

[highdyke]

I can see that, which is why I wouldn't go for one size fits all approach. Conversely, I've been on my own in places, and pretty nasty things have happened with near misses or suicides, you have to learn to deal with things on the ground, awful things, many miles away.

This is where my motivation may seem odd and may seem to conflict. I want stuff like GSM-R, better comms, level crossings abolished, and things machines can do better taken out of people's hands. Signaller's point of view, you would have a different one, wanting two on a train etc. We used to get this stuff all the time, 1000s trains a day, used by 100,000s thousands of people, adds up to a lot of possibilities. I'd rather have the guard on the train not running up the track, I'm miles away, can you see my point?!

 

[ComUtoR]

This is where my motivation may seem odd and may seem to conflict. I want stuff like GSM-R, better comms, level crossings abolished, and things machines can do better taken out of people's hands. Signaller's point of view, you would have a different one, wanting two on a train etc

In some respects I do understand what you are alluding too and your long post I also agreed with some things. Technology should make our lives better, jobs easier, and passengers safer. Technology should *not be used to replace people.

We need both.

 

[highdyke]

Indeed we do. What's taking place in the Thameslink core right now, Traffic management, ETCS, ATO is more or less the blueprint for the next 30 years.

GSR-M is coming up for replacement, an out-of-data low capacity network. The next generation systems will have FTN-X high capacity data networks, signalling, wifi, train management and other data streamed over it.

The debate isn't going to go away on 'how much automation' in transport and other apps, all roles will be redefined. It may happen quicker than many think, FTN-X is there, many of these new ROC signalling interlockings are upgradable to L2 ETCS, ATO is now just a module.

http://www.siemens.com/press/pool/d...-innotrans/background-automated-driving-e.pdf

http://www.railtechnologymagazine.com/Interviews/laying-the-foundation-for-a-digital-railway-

http://www.railtechnologymagazine.c...-roll-out-wireless-ftnx-network-in-six-months

 

[313103]

So how you would motivate the people that don't give a damn and go running to the union every time someone threatens to remove them?

I mean a crap signalman/guard/tech or driver gets paid the same as a good one. Where's the incentive to be any good?

Safety should never be compromised, as I said everything is recorded and things added to records. Hanging onto your job is a pretty good incentive!

Sadly when it comes to DOO the companies use a one size fits all when it comes to displacing staff.

This was me before DOO in 2013, Attendance was in the high 90%, the only time i had off sick was on two occasions one in 1998 and the other in 2011 when i done my back in and needed drugs that meant i couldnt do my job a period of around 7 weeks in total. My disciplinary record was well i didnt have one, i was proud of my job, i did on the whole more then what the JD said, i have never needed to use the union services other then to assist me when i represented someone. None of these meant that i was not subject to the same treatment as everyone else (leave or take a lesser role).

You see once a company has gone down the road of DOO, you will never be able to motivate those that have been displaced (one of the reasons i chose to leave actually, the company didnt want me and i didnt want to work for a company that didnt want me), the companies only keep you because they dont want to look the bad guys and make everyone compulsory redundant so they make up roles to fit you in, and then offer you a cash incentive to leave they dont really want you and if the trade union wasn't about that is exactly what they would do.

Sadly now the choices people have of coming onto the railway with a long term ambition are dwindling all the time, the only secure role now is to be a driver. Not everyone wants or can be one of them so what other choices is there?

As long as hsts are running i know i can set the alarm for work, once they have gone i will have no role to play in the industry. I will have to be another burden on the state.

 

[infobleep]

This is why such a them and us culture exists. Nobody really understands each others jobs. I could wax lyrical about Signaller but I chose not to; unless for fun.

If a Driver doesn't understand overlaps then they don't pass the rules course as its part of a pass/fail section The problem I have found is that we are shown very basic information about signals and overlaps etc. Then the real world hits and nothing you have been taught relates to what is happening due to interlocking, restrictive overlaps, blocking regulations, approach control, etc etc.

I have also learnt that sectional timings also do not relate to any real world driving. We have a few timing points where you will NEVER make it. My schedule is what I drive to. I am late/early based on stations rather than TRUST points.

If I get held at a Red, would I still get performance pay ?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


We get many delay reports for a single minute.

That's fascinating. Why a minute?

My train was 10 minutes late tonight but no reason given by the guard or even an acknowledgement of the delay, which to be fair is what I was after, not to much the reason. I knew why I was late since I'd read about it online.

The guard did announce the next station and connections and I think k that may have been a good point to acknowledge the delay.

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

Not all TOC's are the same and the other TOC I drive for has a 3 minute threshold.

There is also a difference between a delay minute and the cumulative minute. I've seen reports of 1000 delay minutes being attributed to a single train yet the Drivers report only asked about a few minutes. Your right in some respects but we can, and do, get report requests for a single minute.

I would agree that from my perspective, late running means pretty much nothing when its a few minutes. When it was PPM there is a 5min window anyway. RTR is bringing a new approach to delays but TRUST is so out of date that we need a new and better system to track the trains in such detail.

I've been 20+ and never seen a report but I can get a report for a single minutes delay from the sidings (which is signaller controlled)

I don't envy the attribution teams.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Keeping on topic. I'm DOO mostly and I've had many signals go back. Some of the more scary ones I've come off track and cancelled the rest of my duty. When we are out there with just ourselves we make different decisions. A cuppa from a second member of staff and someone to talk it out with quickly can make a difference to my day. Just another thing I respect Guards for.

This is why I wouldn't be a train driver but might have considered it in the days of fireman as there would be someone else to talk and discuss things with. Another pair of eyes at the front of the train, never mind the guard.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

 

[plymothian]

That's fascinating. Why a minute?

My train was 10 minutes late tonight but no reason given by the guard or even an acknowledgement of the delay, which to be fair is what I was after, not to much the reason. I knew why I was late since I'd read about it online.

The guard did announce the next station and connections and I think k that may have been a good point to acknowledge the delay.

You're now thinking about delays from the wrong perspective.

TOCs don't have to tell passengers why the train is delayed, but the staff running the train have to tell the TOC delay attribution team why.

The driver/guard may know that they left x minutes late because of y (even if the TOC, let alone passenger, knows why), but woe betide they then lose as subsequent 1 minute at a further station, else they'll get a DAS and asked to explain why.

 

[infobleep]

You're now thinking about delays from the wrong perspective.

TOCs don't have to tell passengers why the train is delayed, but the staff running the train have to tell the TOC delay attribution team why.

The driver/guard may know that they left x minutes late because of y (even if the TOC, let alone passenger, knows why), but woe betide they then lose as subsequent 1 minute at a further station, else they'll get a DAS and asked to explain why.

If we behaved like that, some people would say we were being to precise and cars don't get you to your destination at a precise time so why expect it from trains.

I don't begrudge delays. These things happen. Less keen when it's not acknowledged though.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

 

[BRblue]

You mean you don't agree with him? Not quite the same thing is it?:roll:

If that is what I had meant I would of said it... I'm not sure why your having a dig at me Antman, in the past I have gone out of my way to PM you to explain my position. The fact you have chosen to ignore that shows that you are only interested in one side of the argument.
I agree with some of Highdykes posts and disagree with others... but technology is not the be all and end all as he claims and many of us know this.

 

[highdyke]

As long as hsts are running i know i can set the alarm for work, once they have gone i will have no role to play in the industry. I will have to be another burden on the state.

Well all the places I worked, or planned to work, have closed or are about to close. The railways let people down with transferable qualifications, the Unions let people down by trying to hold back the sands of time and not getting guarantees about staff development and opposing external training. People keep saying, having a Guard is best to guarantee jobs, Southern have just come in, changed the contracts, and now nobody has any guarantees - only until the end of the franchise - which the Union is now trying to get stripped.

I feel sorry for you, chances are though the guards will last for about as long as the ROC programme takes to get in, so you have a while yet. I hope you fine some other work in the industry.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I agree with some of Highdykes posts and disagree with others... but technology is not the be all and end all as he claims and many of us know this.

It's not no, I have my doubts about a lot of things, difference is I'm open to the possibilities, others are in denial.

 

[Fincra5]

Well all the places I worked, or planned to work, have closed or are about to close. The railways let people down with transferable qualifications, the Unions let people down by trying to hold back the sands of time and not getting guarantees about staff development and opposing external training. People keep saying, having a Guard is best to guarantee jobs, Southern have just come in, changed the contracts, and now nobody has any guarantees - only until the end of the franchise - which the Union is now trying to get stripped.

I feel sorry for you, chances are though the guards will last for about as long as the ROC programme takes to get in, so you have a while yet. I hope you fine some other work in the industry.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


It's not no, I have my doubts about a lot of things, difference is I'm open to the possibilities, others are in denial.

So... the ROC program means every train can be DOO...
I do fail to see how that is possible, I didn't realise the ROC program included DOO equipment on platforms or retro fitted to older trains.
I must have missed something. :roll:

 

[Antman]

If that is what I had meant I would of said it... I'm not sure why your having a dig at me Antman, in the past I have gone out of my way to PM you to explain my position. The fact you have chosen to ignore that shows that you are only interested in one side of the argument.
I agree with some of Highdykes posts and disagree with others... but technology is not the be all and end all as he claims and many of us know this.

Yes and I do appreciate you having taken the time to PM me

 

[313103]

I feel sorry for you, chances are though the guards will last for about as long as the ROC programme takes to get in, so you have a while yet. I hope you fine some other work in the industry.

Sadly i am not a guard anymore, i am now at more or less entry level again being a dispatcher, that is why i can still set the alarm, my primary role is dispatch HSTs however once they are replaced i will be made surplus to requirements for the third time in my career. as that will be the drivers job. Now as i am at the bottom rung of the ladder where else do i go? The only vacancies i see are for middle management in grades who at some stage will also be displaced, drivers vacancies are few and far between plus i am now to old for that.

It is ironic that one company changes there rolling stock and it affects staff of another, yet the staff are powerless to do anything about it, the sands of time are certainly changing.

 

[BestWestern]

Nope, because it's not in my gift and I have other things to do. I can see people have valid points all round, but in the end there has to be a workable solution.

If it was up to me:

1. It'd get written agreements about train manning, I support two people on the train most of the time. There should be some exceptions for operational requirements (ECS, emergency workings, heavily used parts of the network where there is manning on platforms and metro ops).

2. Trade off stuff like traditional route learning and detonator protection for guards, for flexibility, go anywhere status, and enhance the passenger experience to the full extent, fully meeting the equity act. Traditional route knowledge should be replaced by a type of google maps for rail, powered by a continuous data stream (tied into wifi and other signalling data, DSD activation), with emergency calls built in, so the control centre can pinpoint the exact position. Passengers should be able to call the Guard/Driver/Control centre at all times. Announcements can be from Guard/Driver/Control centre.

3. Get rid of station barriers (except metro areas) and most ticket offices (except very busy stations) and make the guard (or other name like OBS) the centre of customer service, give him/her the authority to make judgements on things customer service wise rather than sticking rigidly to procedure. Fully safety trained with first aid, dealing with emergencies.

4. Have no compulsory redundancies.

5. Take the safety of door operation from both the driver and guard, recognising technology may offer a better solution.

6. Move some of the training away from the TOCs and NR, to college based BTEC type qualifications and third party training. BTECs in rail ops, would include understand all the operation roles on the railway, not just one role. The training for the majority of most ops roles can be done with classroom training and simulators. They should be fully certificated and be recognised outside/inside the industry.

7. Introduce professional railway management qualifications at colleges and universities.

8. Make use of technology where it is sensible to introduce enhancements in operations, energy consumption, safety, and efficiency.

9. Unions should move from political organisations to trade organisations.

10. I'd have had full consultation with all concerned, thus in order to take on their points of view, do full risk assessments. Explain how all roles on the railway work together via presentations.

That's my position on these matters.

A very well thought out post. Sadly, however, your suggestions regarding what would be a very substantial investment in staff training, fail to appreciate that the sole purpose of the 'OBS' exercise etc is to cut staff and cut costs.

This isn't about investing in staff, in any way shape or form, nor is it about the 'customer experience'. Very much the opposite.