LNW-GW Joint
Veteran Member
What business or government dept can give guarantees of jobs 5 years hence?
-
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!
Southern DOO: ASLEF members vote 79.1% for revised deal
- Thread starter hornbyfan99
- Start date
- Status
What business or government dept can give guarantees of jobs 5 years hence?
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Robertj21a
On Moderation
- Joined
- 22 Sep 2013
- Messages
- 7,691
I fail to see how the holder of *any* franchise could possibly guarantee that the role would extend beyond the end of their franchise - it would be quite ridiculous to suggest that they could make any such guarantee. Seems very odd if that was what was asked.
Mintona
Established Member
Fairly straightforward. Keep them as guards, and keep them compulsory on all trains. They'll still be needed in the next franchise then.
To me this basically points to RMT want Go Ahead stripped of the franchise. I think this has been their agenda all along. They could have easily agreed to all services of up to 10 coaches being DOO north of Gatwick. Convert RNO's and RPO's to OBS and they work on the above services.
Well RMT still has at least one card to play.. lots of Employment Tribunals for constructive dismissal.. make it horrendously expensive for GTR and DfT.. then watch the fun when reliability is still rubbish..
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
So all you want is for RMT to sell the interests of it's members down the river... do you actually understand the role of a TU?
cjmillsnun
Established Member
- Joined
- 13 Feb 2011
- Messages
- 3,275
To me it points that RMT want to try and protect its members long term. Taking away their safety critical roles makes them expendable. Which is exactly what will happen in the next franchise.
To keep them safety critical (aka guards or conductors) means they can't be done away with.
Govia have behaved in a despicable manner, meaning this strike was on from the outset, and this has only been strengthened since the strikes started and Govia's behaviour got worse.
Now RMT are not blameless. Their PR has helped to wind Govia up, but this has improved of late.
The deal today offered by RMT was good. I know people in industrial relations that said this was reasonable. Unfortunately because Govia are the DfT's puppet in all this, the answer was always going to be no.
Hardly selling their members down the river. This total inflexibility is one of the things that did for the trade union movement in the past. One of the roles of a trade union is to, get the best deal in pay conditions etc for the MAJORITY of their members
I'm not saying I'd support any of those changes. Personally I really hope all sides can soon reach agreement, make up and move on, but like many others I remember, the power cuts, uncollected refuse, unburied bodies,bread ques etc of the late 70s, these were largely the ACTUAL consequences of allowing trade union power to get way out of control, so I'm simply saying that I don't feel the government will stand idly by if the unions really are determined to turn this into a huge long drawn out battle
Last edited:
Since when can they not be done away with. All it takes is too put in the necessary trains and infrastructure on routes not signed off for DOO(P) before the start of the next franchise. DFT say next holder must run all services DOO and they will fund redundancies.
313103
Established Member
- Joined
- 13 May 2006
- Messages
- 1,595
Oh the RMT has an agenda ( must be insider information this poster has). Yet GTR doesnt have one!
So what i am reading here the RMT started the dispute and GTR are just an innocent standby.
There never is going to be a compromise, because it's a game of railway risk.
Once the guards are no longer required to run services, they (and the RMT) have no bargaining power. Ticket office staff are a classic example.
If you are on the right, you may argue the RMT are blackmailing the employer into unsustainable terms and conditions, restricting markets and dodging any form of legal liability.
if you are on the left, you may argue that if they don't stand up to this, they are toast and well-paid jobs will be lost. Why should private companies pay managers so much and tax-payers contribute to profits in a naturally loss-making industry.
If you in are government, you may argue that railway costs are unsustainable in the long run and this will inhibit investment. Besides there are other real demands on government cash and voters don't like high fares.
I couldn't possibly comment.
Once the guards are no longer required to run services, they (and the RMT) have no bargaining power. Ticket office staff are a classic example.
If you are on the right, you may argue the RMT are blackmailing the employer into unsustainable terms and conditions, restricting markets and dodging any form of legal liability.
if you are on the left, you may argue that if they don't stand up to this, they are toast and well-paid jobs will be lost. Why should private companies pay managers so much and tax-payers contribute to profits in a naturally loss-making industry.
If you in are government, you may argue that railway costs are unsustainable in the long run and this will inhibit investment. Besides there are other real demands on government cash and voters don't like high fares.
I couldn't possibly comment.
Last edited:
313103
Established Member
- Joined
- 13 May 2006
- Messages
- 1,595
I dont know how you can draw a conclusion over mass disruption all over the country by many different groups of workers in the 1970s, to a isolated one in one small part of the rail industry in the 21st century, i mean many people in this group probably wasnt alive then.
I do get the point though, the tories would rather we are subservient to them, and anyone who disagrees will be sent on the next boat to Australia.
Of course GTR has an agenda as well to follow out their franchise obligations so Horton and his cronies get their bonuses.
The language of the RMT's press releases about basket franchise just makes me think they are determined the franchise is removed from Govia.
BestWestern
Established Member
- Joined
- 6 Feb 2011
- Messages
- 6,736
The RMT have not, as far as I'm aware, agreed to Guards being relieved of their dispatch duties. Your comments appear to overlook that issue completely. That remains as the heart of this dispute, as well as the dispute at Scotrail and the dispute at Northern, the forthcoming dispute on the Mersey and the previous dispute at Great Western. 'OBS' remains an unacceptable proposition.
I am merely suggesting they accept DOO north of Gatwick on the majority of services. All East, West coast and Arun valley services have a guard plus East Grinstead and Uckfield services to and from East Croydon.
WatcherZero
Established Member
- Joined
- 25 Feb 2010
- Messages
- 10,272
In the terms they offered that was published in the press release, guaranteed till the end of the franchise in 2021 and in the following Franchise if the company wins it at the level for which a guarantee has already been given. Its not written down as a new offer because its already been conceded.
Robertj21a
On Moderation
- Joined
- 22 Sep 2013
- Messages
- 7,691
I must be missing a key point here. How does anyone know what will be needed in the next franchise ?
Surely, even if GTR agree to keeping guards now, there's nothing to say we won't be going over the same ground again under the next franchise.
We don't even know what form the next franchises will take. Will they simply be split back into GNTL & Southern, or will DfT carve them up differently? What will go to TfL?
No-one has a guaranteed job forever, and especially not a guarantee that the job will stay identical.
ANorthernGuard
Established Member
- Joined
- 8 Oct 2010
- Messages
- 2,662
A MESSAGE FROM SOUTHERN CONDUCTORS COMPANY COUNCIL
Talks have broken down at ACAS .The Company refused the RMT offer to call off strike action in return for GTR accepting the ScotRail solution .
The Company responded to our offer with a written proposal , which if it had been accepted , would have signalled the end of our grade . In content there was little different to what was on offer in May .
This is the GTR response to the RMT offer .
! )" Southern will guarantee that every train currently operated with a conductor will continue to have either a traditional conductor or a second member of on board staff /diagrammed /rostered ."
They talk of a traditional Conductor or 2nd member of staff diagrammed/rostered to service . For second member of staff read non safety critical OBS
Diagrammed /rostered means nothing other than they will run the train regardless of the second person being there .
2) " Southern guarantee that traditional conductors will retain current competence and will guarantee that a second member of on board staff willbe trained to a "safety competent " level including track safety training , train evacuation , traction competence and full commercial route knowledge ( excluding train dispatch ) "
Guarantee traditional conductors will retain current competence .
That is not a guarantee from GTR rather it's a requirement for the 192 conductors that they want to operate 313s 171s and the Clapham Junction / Milton Keynes route . The trains are either not compliant (no in cab cctv ) or the route has been deemed unsuitable .
The statement that a second member of staff will be trained to a safety competent level is meaningless . The only legally recognised safety level is safety critical . Any other " safety training " has no standing in the industry and can be phased out any time GTR chose .
The final point regarding commercial route knowledge is at best confused . Do they really believe the only part of route knowledge they would be excluding would be train despatch . What about route knowledge required for train failure , collisions etc . It is disturbing to note that those drawing up these plans seem to have scant regard or understanding of the requirements of the conductor role .
3) Southern will agree a list of exceptional circumstances , to be agreed with the RMT whereby a train can stay in service without a second member of staff on board , for the benefit of the customers .
This issue was not discussed as we require a 2nd safety critical member of staff on board the service before we could discuss anything . The Company are still insisting on an OBS type 2nd person .
4 ) "These proposals , including the above guarantee are dependant upon agreement that services with a second member of on board staff ( rather than a traditional conductor ) will have the driver in full control of train dispatch . Agreement for this to be ratified at local level " .
Again we would be unable to discuss this point as GTR are insisting that the second person will not be a Safety Critical trained Conductor .
The union believes the issue of door control can only be sensibly addressed by a forum of the type set up to resolve the ScotRail agreement .
GTR have sent you out a multitude of "offers " they claim were made to resolve the dispute .
What you need to do is separate the wheat from the chaff . There is a lot of "chaff " in their so called offers but very little "wheat "
Consider what the catalysts for this dispute are . A) No extension of DOO . A Safety Critical trained conductor to remain on all present non DOO services . Conductors to retain door closing responsibilities .
If you then read through all offers sent out by GTR you will see they fail to address any of the core issues which forced the Conductor grade into dispute.
Don't be misled by GTRs "CHAFF " as they try to undermine our resolve .
Mick Cash RMT General Secretary led our negotiating team on all three days of talks at ACAS and I can assure you every effort was made to try and facilitate an agreement .
The refusal of GTR to accept the RMT's offer to suspend the action means that the five days of strike action will take place .
I know I don't need to remind anyone of the cause we are fighting for or why we need to be successful .
Anyone who doubted that victory was possible need only look to the outcome of the dispute in Scotland .
A pathway is there that can offer both sides an acceptable resolution .
The responsibility lies with all of us to maximise support for next weeks action and ensure that sufficient pressure is applied to GTR to encourage them to negotiate a mutually acceptable resolution to the dispute .
I note we have been sent an email from Piero McCarthy in which he states that the RMT have refused many extensive offers and that he is "gutted".
Perhaps Piero would like to say how many of the extensive offers the RMT refused , addressed any of the core points I have listed . The core points which the Conductors he is there to manage voted by a massive majority to defend .
The people who have the right to feel "gutted" are the travelling public who have suffered due to GTR"s failure to provide a train service along with a refusal to negotiate responsibly and Frontline staff who have had the finger of blame pointed at them to cover for GTRs failures .
DON'T BE CONNED BY GTR BLUSTER . CHECK THE FACTS AND STAND WITH YOUR COLLEAGUES TO DEFEND YOUR GRADE
STAY TOGETHER STAND UNITED AND WE WILL WIN
Got this from the rmt Facebook page. As a guard it makes perfect sense now if only the rmt PR gurus used this things could change
Talks have broken down at ACAS .The Company refused the RMT offer to call off strike action in return for GTR accepting the ScotRail solution .
The Company responded to our offer with a written proposal , which if it had been accepted , would have signalled the end of our grade . In content there was little different to what was on offer in May .
This is the GTR response to the RMT offer .
! )" Southern will guarantee that every train currently operated with a conductor will continue to have either a traditional conductor or a second member of on board staff /diagrammed /rostered ."
They talk of a traditional Conductor or 2nd member of staff diagrammed/rostered to service . For second member of staff read non safety critical OBS
Diagrammed /rostered means nothing other than they will run the train regardless of the second person being there .
2) " Southern guarantee that traditional conductors will retain current competence and will guarantee that a second member of on board staff willbe trained to a "safety competent " level including track safety training , train evacuation , traction competence and full commercial route knowledge ( excluding train dispatch ) "
Guarantee traditional conductors will retain current competence .
That is not a guarantee from GTR rather it's a requirement for the 192 conductors that they want to operate 313s 171s and the Clapham Junction / Milton Keynes route . The trains are either not compliant (no in cab cctv ) or the route has been deemed unsuitable .
The statement that a second member of staff will be trained to a safety competent level is meaningless . The only legally recognised safety level is safety critical . Any other " safety training " has no standing in the industry and can be phased out any time GTR chose .
The final point regarding commercial route knowledge is at best confused . Do they really believe the only part of route knowledge they would be excluding would be train despatch . What about route knowledge required for train failure , collisions etc . It is disturbing to note that those drawing up these plans seem to have scant regard or understanding of the requirements of the conductor role .
3) Southern will agree a list of exceptional circumstances , to be agreed with the RMT whereby a train can stay in service without a second member of staff on board , for the benefit of the customers .
This issue was not discussed as we require a 2nd safety critical member of staff on board the service before we could discuss anything . The Company are still insisting on an OBS type 2nd person .
4 ) "These proposals , including the above guarantee are dependant upon agreement that services with a second member of on board staff ( rather than a traditional conductor ) will have the driver in full control of train dispatch . Agreement for this to be ratified at local level " .
Again we would be unable to discuss this point as GTR are insisting that the second person will not be a Safety Critical trained Conductor .
The union believes the issue of door control can only be sensibly addressed by a forum of the type set up to resolve the ScotRail agreement .
GTR have sent you out a multitude of "offers " they claim were made to resolve the dispute .
What you need to do is separate the wheat from the chaff . There is a lot of "chaff " in their so called offers but very little "wheat "
Consider what the catalysts for this dispute are . A) No extension of DOO . A Safety Critical trained conductor to remain on all present non DOO services . Conductors to retain door closing responsibilities .
If you then read through all offers sent out by GTR you will see they fail to address any of the core issues which forced the Conductor grade into dispute.
Don't be misled by GTRs "CHAFF " as they try to undermine our resolve .
Mick Cash RMT General Secretary led our negotiating team on all three days of talks at ACAS and I can assure you every effort was made to try and facilitate an agreement .
The refusal of GTR to accept the RMT's offer to suspend the action means that the five days of strike action will take place .
I know I don't need to remind anyone of the cause we are fighting for or why we need to be successful .
Anyone who doubted that victory was possible need only look to the outcome of the dispute in Scotland .
A pathway is there that can offer both sides an acceptable resolution .
The responsibility lies with all of us to maximise support for next weeks action and ensure that sufficient pressure is applied to GTR to encourage them to negotiate a mutually acceptable resolution to the dispute .
I note we have been sent an email from Piero McCarthy in which he states that the RMT have refused many extensive offers and that he is "gutted".
Perhaps Piero would like to say how many of the extensive offers the RMT refused , addressed any of the core points I have listed . The core points which the Conductors he is there to manage voted by a massive majority to defend .
The people who have the right to feel "gutted" are the travelling public who have suffered due to GTR"s failure to provide a train service along with a refusal to negotiate responsibly and Frontline staff who have had the finger of blame pointed at them to cover for GTRs failures .
DON'T BE CONNED BY GTR BLUSTER . CHECK THE FACTS AND STAND WITH YOUR COLLEAGUES TO DEFEND YOUR GRADE
STAY TOGETHER STAND UNITED AND WE WILL WIN
Got this from the rmt Facebook page. As a guard it makes perfect sense now if only the rmt PR gurus used this things could change
Last edited:
It'd be horrendously expensive for the RMT as well. Don't forget you have to pay to bring cases for constructive dismissal now as well, thanks to the Tories. The RMT also would have to also pay solicitors.
Surely both disputes revolved around saftey so nothing wrong with conflating the two as the saftey regulations are the same for both I believe.
Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk
Goldfish62
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 14 Feb 2010
- Messages
- 13,228
Yes, of course there will be those who think Scotrail was wrong. But then you're talking a different company, a different government and a different country.
No, both disputes are focused on the preservation of members' jobs. That is the purpose of a union.
Everything else is window dressing.
Until a driver ends up in court or another Kentish Town happens......
How dare you suggest they use something sensible as this. It might win them some more public support. What would they want that. Lol.
I look forward to travelling during next weeks strikes as I support their reasoning for the strikes.
Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk
Last edited:
I agree but only to a point. The purpose of the union became much more than jobs. I learned, before I started the railway, that without someone to protect the industry you are working in. Your rights as an employee and your workplace conditions can be sacrificed at the drop of a hat without any oversight. Management can literally do anything they want without penalty.
I worked many years in retail. Zero hour contracts are rife and they can be seriously abused. Personally I see the good in them but many places really do use them to both abuse staffing levels and as a mechanic to avoid those little things. Like pensions, sick pay, holiday pay, in work benefits, overtime rates etc. I saw the industry make changes to employment contracts specifically to screw staff over and I saw the decline of any real employment rights. It became a shut up and do what your told place to work. If you don't like it, leave. I should know. I was Management.
I have friends in other industries where they are non unionised and the number of complaints about working practices, safety shortcuts, bullying culture, lack of equality, and no pay rises in X years. They have no union, and Management do what they wish.
I discovered unions a few years back in another employment. I found that I was treated differently. The place I worked was more rules bound, my contract wasn't broken just because, My working hours came down (or at least became more fixed) and the equipment I used was safer and actually worked for a change.
Then I joined the Railway. Ho Le Fuk. A union that worked alongside Management. A union that worked with the industry safety bodies. A union that helped reduce incidents. A union that protected the entire workforce (one rule for all, not just members). A union who helped push the industry forwards. You know what. For the first time in my employment life I actually got a regular pay rise. I have still been asked to compromise safety rules but I can be resolute in a firm no because I know the union has my back. Management still push and still fight for reduction in conditions and still try to circumvent employment law, but the union is preventing them.
Unions are more than jobs.
BestWestern
Established Member
- Joined
- 6 Feb 2011
- Messages
- 6,736
Amen to you sir!
I'd go further, to add that the rail unions are some of the best anywhere. Ask bus drivers what they get from theirs. They do the best they can, of course, but the railway is head and shoulders above. It's sad that the media would have you believe that is unacceptable in our wonderful modern society.
Yes it may be that two but I still think safety is at the heart of the matter and on that point, both rail companies have to follow the same saftey regulations. There are not separate regulations for Scotland as fat as I am aware and if their are, then they would apply for Scotrail services that venture past the Scottish boarders.
Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk
I agree that safety is a sincere and genuine concern of the RMT, but don't be deceived into thinking it's the "heart of the matter". The RMT exists to protects its members' interests, pay and conditions. What's happening is a forced reduction in conditions, a loss of job security, and likely some pay too.
- Status