No class 700 trains, ETCS, automatic door opening, target dwell times, harmonisation of roles, nothing to do with it Dave...Nothing at all, no reason whatsoever why GTR might want to change contracts. It's all a conspiracy Dave because people just look at the world from their point of view. I mean it's those awful Tories Dave, profit before safety..
-
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
No class 700 trains, ETCS, automatic door opening, target dwell times, harmonisation of roles, nothing to do with it Dave...Nothing at all, no reason whatsoever why GTR might want to change contracts. It's all a conspiracy Dave because people just look at the world from their point of view. I mean it's those awful Tories Dave, profit before safety..
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Tetchytyke
Veteran Member
Do you think GTR's business case stacks up without a) reducing OBS numbers or b) reducing OBS wages?
I'm interested in your angle, because I don't see how paying the same number of people the same amount of money to be on the same number of trains represents a meaningful saving.
It's not about paranoia, no matter how much you want to portray everyone as cynical, paranoid lefties. It's just that operational flexibility in disruption wouldn't even pay for Brown's pay rise this year. So what's the real motivation for forcing these changes through?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I'm still at a loss as to what your point actually is.
The decision to go on strike is a democratic one, and every time I've voted for strike action I've done so safe in the knowledge it will cost me money. If I've not considered the dispute worthy of losing cold, hard cash over I've voted no. Strike funds are not to replace wages, they are to assist people in significant hardship.
You're looking at it the wrong way round. The trade union do not instruct the members to go on strike, the members instruct the trade union to support a strike action. We see this with the junior doctors, whose own trade union recommended that they cease strike action; the doctors voted otherwise.
Last edited:
They're going to reduce overtime - perhaps not now, but certainly in the future.
After all, that's what the RMT has been campaigning for for years, isn't it?
There'll be cost savings in not having to release staff to learn the route, not having to release them for safety critical training, not having to do safety crit medicals on them....and so on.
Tetchytyke
Veteran Member
In which case there won't be an OBS on every train, unless they recruit more of them, which would cost more than forking out the overtime.
So, once again, we're back to the GTR plan only making financial sense if they don't stick to their promises.
Agreed, but that wouldn't pay for Piero McCarthy's relocation costs after he bounces into yet another new job every nine months.
Last edited:
Given that it was an ITT requirement, they wouldn't necessarily need a positive business case; however, I'm sure they turned it into one and I agree with you that it seems likely that they factored in a reduction in numbers. Any wage reduction is likely to have little effect this franchise anyway, but they may well have had a reduced rate for starters, as has been done in the past.
There are a number of ways they might expect to reduce numbers that would still see a second member of staff rostered on every train, e.g. through reduced cover ratios and/or more efficient diagrams. However, in the future some services might see that second person disappear for part or all of the journey.
Given GoVia's record on Southern/GatEx a certain amount of cynicism would seem reasonably placed.
Indeed.
Another factor is that non-safety critical staff won't have their conditions and working times regulated by Hidden (or its successor), will they?
It all adds up.
Last edited:
Tetchytyke
Veteran Member
I can see plenty of ways that the change to non-safety-critical OBS staff will save cash. If you can run your train without them then you need less cover, you can run tighter diagrams and, as you say, you can increase working hours, etc.
Sadly none of the ways that cash can be saved are compatible with Connex Charlie's promise that every train will have an OBS and no guard will lose money (though I note he doesn't promise they won't have to work more hours for the same dough) or their job with the change to OBS.
I'm interested in the views of people who think the promises and the business case align, because sitting here on the outside it doesn't look like it to me.
Hidden is a good thing. Are you suggesting that the removal of the constraints on working times is a positive step for employment ?
Hidden is another safety constraint being removed. If the OBS role is still safety trained then why wouldn't hidden apply ?
What? Southern don't have class 700's. BTW I used to be a Tory voter until they have shown their true colours post 2015 election.
I think to be fair a certain amount of cynicism is required/understandable. The changes stem from new trains, changing working practices, a wish from the DFT for people to be collecting revenue rather than being tied up with doors, a very crowded railway that is going to need Traffic Management, ATO, a hard look at getting more, longer trains on the network to meet rising demand.
I see a dispute now has popped up on VTEC, not looked into any detail that, but I suspect there are some similarities.
I couldn't tell you what the business case says, but clearly there is one based on deployment, flexibility, training times. I have been involved in parts of the network where DOO ends and Guard operation starts. When things go wrong it is a nightmare getting the Guarded trains back on track, and I can see why the DFT/TOCs might want to change that. There's some real issues with dwell times on parts of the network too, NR did some papers on it.
I'm not dismissive of counter points of view, but I understand why the DFT and TOCs might want a flexible role change, I'm not buying into some of the conspiracies. Having been involved in stuff in the 90s, when all sorts of theories about profit before safety were hatched, that really wasn't the case. The truth was it was mismanagement.
DarloRich
Veteran Member
Paul - I have read this post and all of your others on the point of strike pay and have no idea what your point is. You seem to fundamentally misunderstand the concept both of strike pay and unions generally.
I have never been on strike (except when a student) but when exercising my right to vote on strike action not once has the level or value of strike pay crossed my mind. I couldn't tell you ( and don't really care) when the level of strike pay was considered against the value of an average percentage of the salaries normally earned by striking workers. It forms no part of my thoughts on whether, or not, to strike. As a local union representative I have never been asked about strike pay even when strike action has looked likely.
I think the following sums up the position.
Last edited:
I'll lay my cards on the table and say I've never voted Tory apart from one local election when the person involved saved a heritage line. Normally it's Lib-dem for me, Labour in 1997. I am considering it for the the next election to keep Corbyn out. I am impressed with their rail support late to be fair, though they haven't got things right with jobs and housing yet. I do run a business employing people these days, so maybe I have become a little more business minded of late which leads you to see cost everywhere and value. Having been on the other end of the safety thing (more than you might imagine!) this is why this debate interests me.
Last edited:
"Safety trained" isn't the same as safety critical.
And in response to your first question - no, absolutely not. Hidden is a very good thing.
I don't think Govia will make any worthwhile cash from converting guards to OBS or glorified RPIs. They've promised no job losses or loss of wages so it doesn't take a genius to figure out something is amiss. The boys from France and Newcastle are doing the dirty work for someone else...
Look towards the DfT, in particular Peter Wilkinson and the fact he's been the bid advisor to Govia for the franchise and now has conveniently landed himself a job as passenger services director for the government overseeing the franchise. Conflict of interest surely?
Without wishing to go political, he's stated he wanted this fight, the Tories love it as it's a good bit of union bashing to finish off Maggie's mission, the accountants love it as it's one less grade to pay millions too and we can have the DfT utopian vision of 12 car trains full of hundreds of people with one member of staff. This is despite a DOO Networker on fire with commuters evacuating themselves, again.
I'd place some money that the grand scheme is GTR can keep OBS until 2021 and let the dust settle but once that new franchise begins you can wave goodbye to the idea of onboard rostered staff. By 2022 they'll have deemed OBS to be redundant like Train Hosts on Gatwick Express and Great Northern, have a load of RPI jobs available at a pay cut and make the OBS redundant. The Southern Conductors know it, many forum members know it and the unions know it. This isn't progress and it most certainly does not enhance the passenger experience. Passengers are getting a worse deal.
GTR have the most incompetent bunch of managers and directors going. They have a failed manager from Connex, a franchise that had bailiffs taking items away from offices because they didn't pay bills and ultimately lost the franchise. A failed manager at various companies including managing STM staff at Northern, look how popular they are in the dispute and prosecutions board of this forum. A lady who's come from Network Rail who I believe hasn't dealt with trade unions at this level before. A former Jarvis Infrastructure director, the same company that went bust because of the Potters Bar accident?
They knew it would be difficult to implement but the way they went about it with threatening staff, lying to the media, withdrawing staff passes, blaming high level of staff sickness when it was actually train crew shortages because they relied on overtime to cover a basic service? That has to be the worst approach possible for a dispute like this. I'd say the wounds will be permanent unless GTR and the top floor of the office clear off.
The front of the Times or Telegraph is interesting today. Hints of GTR been removed.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
The VTEC is more akin to the GWR IEP dispute that's died a death. Another director wanting to make his mark but failed. I'd bet my house and pension that ASLEF won't even entertain talks on DOO with IEP sets on East Coast.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Still the question on what is "safety trained".
Full route, traction and rule book knowledge or a 4 hour PTS course and a box of plasters?
Look towards the DfT, in particular Peter Wilkinson and the fact he's been the bid advisor to Govia for the franchise and now has conveniently landed himself a job as passenger services director for the government overseeing the franchise. Conflict of interest surely?
Without wishing to go political, he's stated he wanted this fight, the Tories love it as it's a good bit of union bashing to finish off Maggie's mission, the accountants love it as it's one less grade to pay millions too and we can have the DfT utopian vision of 12 car trains full of hundreds of people with one member of staff. This is despite a DOO Networker on fire with commuters evacuating themselves, again.
I'd place some money that the grand scheme is GTR can keep OBS until 2021 and let the dust settle but once that new franchise begins you can wave goodbye to the idea of onboard rostered staff. By 2022 they'll have deemed OBS to be redundant like Train Hosts on Gatwick Express and Great Northern, have a load of RPI jobs available at a pay cut and make the OBS redundant. The Southern Conductors know it, many forum members know it and the unions know it. This isn't progress and it most certainly does not enhance the passenger experience. Passengers are getting a worse deal.
GTR have the most incompetent bunch of managers and directors going. They have a failed manager from Connex, a franchise that had bailiffs taking items away from offices because they didn't pay bills and ultimately lost the franchise. A failed manager at various companies including managing STM staff at Northern, look how popular they are in the dispute and prosecutions board of this forum. A lady who's come from Network Rail who I believe hasn't dealt with trade unions at this level before. A former Jarvis Infrastructure director, the same company that went bust because of the Potters Bar accident?
They knew it would be difficult to implement but the way they went about it with threatening staff, lying to the media, withdrawing staff passes, blaming high level of staff sickness when it was actually train crew shortages because they relied on overtime to cover a basic service? That has to be the worst approach possible for a dispute like this. I'd say the wounds will be permanent unless GTR and the top floor of the office clear off.
The front of the Times or Telegraph is interesting today. Hints of GTR been removed.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
The VTEC is more akin to the GWR IEP dispute that's died a death. Another director wanting to make his mark but failed. I'd bet my house and pension that ASLEF won't even entertain talks on DOO with IEP sets on East Coast.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Still the question on what is "safety trained".
Full route, traction and rule book knowledge or a 4 hour PTS course and a box of plasters?
I know, I'm safety critical.
It is still important to remember that "safety trained" individuals still need to be regulated. Use of Hidden is part of that. Just because they aren't safety critical doesn't mean those regulations are suddenly removed. If an OBS supervisor has been working for 15 days in a row, 12hr shifts, with a bare minimal PNB per shift, that person becomes a liability. Their "safety" training is out the window. Part of the RMT's case is that they want specific details in what that "safety training" involves and I have no doubt that they would want specific criteria to be maintained.
Part of the reasons why I would prefer to see the Guard role maintained is because of that level of protection for both staff and passengers. Giving any company the ability to reduce any safety protocols, such as Hidden, just shows how little priority safety really is and that "safety trained" staff is merely another tick box exercise.
If the OBS role allows the removal of Hidden you truly can see that the role does reduce the overall level of safety.
We have a thread on the VTEC dispute which can be found here. Please discuss the new dispute on that thread and leave this one for the on going Southern/DOO discussion.
It's an interesting point about the Unions and Tories. I would say the Unions are probably running the railways too much right now for their members. I think we can probably all agree privatisation has brought on a bit of a gravy train at all levels, nobody wanted to solve the issue until the NR gravy train was stopped after it had build up so much debt, which has come home to roost after it was re-classified. The DFT have always tried to squeeze franchises to get value and reduce the overall call on the public purse from the industry.
The conservatives definitely want the railways to be more commercial, whether you support that is a personal point of view. There's no question that railway finances are unsustainable considering the modal share and the fact it's very hard to get stuff through business cases. Add in the mix talk of automation in other modes (a whole other debate, which I am quite cynical about) you can see why minds have been concentrated.
Of course the RMT/ASLEF do the railways no favours striking quite so much, it doesn't make people feel rail is VFM or reliable. I'm not sure how serious people think this is, but I'll be so bold this is about the very future of the railways themselves. Expect some things to be shelved if this isn't sorted...
Last edited:
When was Wilkinson advising Govia? I can assure you that during the TSGN bid he was leading NR's Alliancing initiative and spoke to all bidders.
LNW-GW Joint
Veteran Member
From Pete Wilkinson's CV: http://www.renaissancetrains.com/pete-wilkinson.html
I'm not sure how up to date this is (undated).
It's a very strong CV.
Was part of the Hull Trains and WMSR management teams.
I'm not sure how up to date this is (undated).
It's a very strong CV.
Was part of the Hull Trains and WMSR management teams.
Yes. DfT were very keen on this and TS as well. At the time NR were also positive (at least the centre was), but that changed soon after PW left to go to DfT (although they went along in Scotland, probably due to the scandal up there at the time!).
Not so sure about the unions running it. I'd like to see more dialogue and co-operation on the future of rail between the government and unions. A nationwide working group, no threats or imposition from individual companies. I remember when Boris was elected he promised to sit down with the unions but alas never once had he organised a meeting. When the night tube dispute was happening he continuously denied to meetings with the union. Instead sat in the chair on LBC until Bob Crow rang in. The night tube should have been a lesson on union and management negotiations. They knew it was coming in, unions requested meetings but were denied until 5 months prior to the opening the managers started to panic but by then it was too late. If LUL had sat down with the 4 unions to discuss plans well before announcing a date I think the strikes could have been avoided.
A starting point would be getting unions involved in the Rail Delivery Group and then onwards to ITT that involve staffing changes.
I agree about the Tory approach but I think the industry needs to take a good hard look of the bloated management structure the industry has accumulated throughout the years. Gone are the days of integrated BR, each TOC has to be seperate so we have a lot of duplication costing money. The front line staff shouldn't be culled, especially in an industry where the passenger or customer numbers are growing year on year. There are more wasteful areas that need to be looked at first but no one is serious about reforming.
Like I mentioned earlier, a lot of these strikes are avoidable if negotiations happen properly. No underhandedness like this OBS farce.
Hmn, it's a nice idea, that does have some merit. The RMT/ASLEF said months ago no DOO long before this all kicked off, that isn't going to change ever. They've said themselves the Merseyrail incident changed everything. Those concerns are not without merit, but they are incredibly inflexible and difficult when they want to be. There's a reputation there and some it it is deserved whatever approach is taken. Having been on strike myself, you get all sorts of weird and wonderful people turn up, talk of social revolution, bringing down capitalism. It goes way beyond changes in terms at conditions.
The attitudes displayed to strike breakers (not that I've done that) and those that disagree have to be seen to be believed. Like religious fundamentalists, some of the hard left are not very nice people. They do not want a discussion, they enjoy a fight if it get's them what they want, deserved or not.
I'm entirely comfortable with workers being treated well and having a say, definitely more a Rowntree rather than a Philip Green/Mike Ashley - everyone thinks they are twits even Daily Mail readers. When changes can't be brought in it does make you wonder who is running it and for whose benefit.
My own view is the Unions are trying to break the privatised railway right now for political reasons, having been instrumental in getting Corbyn into power.
The attitudes displayed to strike breakers (not that I've done that) and those that disagree have to be seen to be believed. Like religious fundamentalists, some of the hard left are not very nice people. They do not want a discussion, they enjoy a fight if it get's them what they want, deserved or not.
I'm entirely comfortable with workers being treated well and having a say, definitely more a Rowntree rather than a Philip Green/Mike Ashley - everyone thinks they are twits even Daily Mail readers. When changes can't be brought in it does make you wonder who is running it and for whose benefit.
My own view is the Unions are trying to break the privatised railway right now for political reasons, having been instrumental in getting Corbyn into power.
Robertj21a
On Moderation
- Joined
- 22 Sep 2013
- Messages
- 7,691
There's a lot of fair comment in that but the Unions also need to play their part much better than they have been in the recent past. If they are seen to simply refuse to discuss issues until X, Y or Z happens - or call strikes over comparatively trivial matters - or ignore the serious difficulties they can cause to the travelling public - then they may be deserving of the negative image with which they are usually associated. The RMT did well under Bob Crow but they seem to have been struggling ever since and a more professional approach (particularly with the media) is long overdue.
but listening to an interview of him and also that garbage he spoke at a meeting recently, he just has a big bugbear with train crew and their wages and saving money through disposing of them!
There are many other ways the railway can save money without changing the role of the guard......its just this guy has got it in for train crew.
The sooner he goes, the better.
The following is an example of how a guard is useful on trains and in this case a OBS might be useful provided they were present and not cut, like those were on Gatwick Express services.
I was a train to Basingstoke this evening which was held outside Woking due to a points failure. The guard kept passengers informed as to what was going on.
As it arrived into Woking 20 minutes late the guard announced is their any doctors on board as we have a medical emergency.
I overheard on staff radio that a passenger had collapse. I wish the passenger well and hope they are OK.
Now what would have happened if it were a Govia run services were there no guards or in 10 years time technology was much the same and there was no OBS staff under the next franchise? Would a passenger have pulled the emergency cord outside of the station rather than getting someone to find the guard? I don't know how the guard was alerted to the problem today but the train did arrive in the station as the guard made his announcement rather than after.
I do feel having the guard was better in this case. I admit it may be that an OBS might help but no one is prepared to say that they will survived beyond the next franchise. So I will assume a worse case scenario and assume they will be slowly gotten ride of.
Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
You mean by the rubbish from the other side? Both sides have sputted rubbish, as well as some valid points now and again. Overall I side with the rail unions' safety arguments though.
Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk
I was a train to Basingstoke this evening which was held outside Woking due to a points failure. The guard kept passengers informed as to what was going on.
As it arrived into Woking 20 minutes late the guard announced is their any doctors on board as we have a medical emergency.
I overheard on staff radio that a passenger had collapse. I wish the passenger well and hope they are OK.
Now what would have happened if it were a Govia run services were there no guards or in 10 years time technology was much the same and there was no OBS staff under the next franchise? Would a passenger have pulled the emergency cord outside of the station rather than getting someone to find the guard? I don't know how the guard was alerted to the problem today but the train did arrive in the station as the guard made his announcement rather than after.
I do feel having the guard was better in this case. I admit it may be that an OBS might help but no one is prepared to say that they will survived beyond the next franchise. So I will assume a worse case scenario and assume they will be slowly gotten ride of.
Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
You mean by the rubbish from the other side? Both sides have sputted rubbish, as well as some valid points now and again. Overall I side with the rail unions' safety arguments though.
Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk
No union is perfect and occasionally I wish they left the political opinion to one side during a dispute. I think many of us including yourself agree that the RMT need to adapt a more media savvy approach, similar to how the BMA handled the Doctors strike. Well thought out press releases and interviews from what I recall. I wouldn't say the RMT are doing a terrible job, some of their leaflets and TV interviews have been good but it's very inconsistent.
As rule of thumb for the railway, if an issue is raised it goes through various meetings and it's recorded as a fail to agree it gets escalated up the union food chain with the union officials and senior managers. If that fails it may eventually end up as a report made out to the Executive Committee (in the case of ASLEF) as whether to ballot members for industrial action. This process can take time unless it's something urgent. In some ballots it should be pointed that the union membership will think differently to the hierarchy in the union and will reject the unions position. So it's not the common misconception of a General Secretary immediately calling the boys out when the vending machine breaks down, it does actually get quite democratic. Various meetings can be arranged at branch level between members to air concerns about forthcoming events.
The RMT and ASLEF made their positions quite clear about DOO. The Merseyrail court cases and the increases in accidents on platforms have changed certainly the ASLEF position of DOO in recent years, the Airdrie Bathgate dispute made a strain on relations between unions but the top level of the unions have changed now. What I wish would happen is that it's nationally discussed between the government, RDG and the unions as a way forward. Within the past year I think there have been disputes with GTR, GWR, Scotrail with rumours of VTEC going that way.
GTR is a test bed to test the unions on future DOO.
Fincra5
Established Member
- Joined
- 6 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 2,636
I agree completely. It in-fact shows these incidents happen!
As far as GTR saying the OBS role will be around until the end of the franchise. Natural Wastage will reduce numbers, it doesn't mean they have to ever recruit new OBS staff in the future!
D1009
Established Member
If that is the case, how will revenue protection be carried out, given that they are also de-staffing stations?
- Status