Southern DOO: ASLEF members vote 79.1% for revised deal

[Andrew32]

No trains to run without guards on Southern Services ( accept Brighton Line) whilst Aslef talks take place according to BBC

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-40137705

 

[infobleep]

No trains to run without guards on Southern Services ( accept Brighton Line) whilst Aslef talks take place according to BBC

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-40137705

I thought they already couldn't run without a guard? It was the OBS that they could run without. I didn't think an OBS was a guard. I know what they mean though from reading the article, even if the headline isnt quite right for the story.

 

[Fincra5]

I thought they already couldn't run without a guard? It was the OBS that they could run without. I didn't think an OBS was a guard. I know what they mean though from reading the article, even if the headline isnt quite right for the story.

Thats what they meant I think. No train will run without an OBS (where there used to be a conductor) on coastways (off the mainline too).

Kinda think, what was the point in trying to change the way it worked before. Bar the mainline!

 

[king_walnut]

The whole point of taking the doors away from conductors was so that trains could still run without them.

 

[Deepgreen]

No trains to run without guards on Southern Services ( accept Brighton Line) whilst Aslef talks take place according to BBC

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-40137705

'Except' the BML.

 

[redbutton]

The agreement is that at least for the duration of the negotiations, every train on the DOO imposed routes must have a second member of crew (Guard or OBS) on board before it leaves the BML. Trains can run driver-only until the point where the route diverges from the main line.

Interestingly, this is the exact same agreement I was told ASLEF and GTR had reached back in September, before everything kicked off. At that time, the company agreed in principle then withdrew (after speaking with their DfT masters, naturally) saying it was not operationally viable.

 

[infobleep]

The agreement is that at least for the duration of the negotiations, every train on the DOO imposed routes must have a second member of crew (Guard or OBS) on board before it leaves the BML. Trains can run driver-only until the point where the route diverges from the main line.

Interestingly, this is the exact same agreement I was told ASLEF and GTR had reached back in September, before everything kicked off. At that time, the company agreed in principle then withdrew (after speaking with their DfT masters, naturally) saying it was not operationally viable.

So how come it's suddenly operationally viable now? I can't see what has changed. Perhaps XDM or maybe someone involved in the talks can explain? If nothing has changed then they did they not do it before? Who stopped them? I suspect I know but I'd like someone to publicly say.

 

[Surreytraveller]

'Except' the BML.

I was in Tesco once, and there was a note on the self-service machines stating that they 'do not except £50 notes'.

 

[Surreytraveller]

So how come it's suddenly operationally viable now? I can't see what has changed.

There's an election in two days' time, that's what's changed.

 

[Minstral25]

The agreement is that at least for the duration of the negotiations, every train on the DOO imposed routes must have a second member of crew (Guard or OBS) on board before it leaves the BML. Trains can run driver-only until the point where the route diverges from the main line.

Interestingly, this is the exact same agreement I was told ASLEF and GTR had reached back in September, before everything kicked off. At that time, the company agreed in principle then withdrew (after speaking with their DfT masters, naturally) saying it was not operationally viable.

Out of interest what is considered the BML for this purpose? Does the Redhill Loop count as part of BML and the short section to Reigate. What about East Grinstead or Horsham? Or do they all need OBS/Guard before transversing?

 

[Carlisle]

Interestingly, this is the exact same agreement I was told ASLEF and GTR had reached back in September, before everything kicked off. At that time, the company agreed in principle then withdrew (after speaking with their DfT masters, naturally) saying it was not operationally viable.

If your looking longer term at the bigger picture then I'm fairly sure many would consider that to be the correct decision by DFT.

 

[Andrew32]

'Except' the BML.

Ho hi reely neede two lern howe two spelle correctlee

 

[philthetube]

I don't think it's asking too much for such signs to be proof read.

For example, our local McDonalds the other week had signs everywhere talking about the coffee machine and that 'Hot Drinks Are Not Avallabel'.

Made me chuckle, but it wouldn't be acceptable in any company i've worked for. Imagine the outcry on here if a TOC were dishing out such signs.

That was a correct statement unless McDonalds have decided to call their hot drinks avallabel

 

[kw12]

The agreement is that at least for the duration of the negotiations, every train on the DOO imposed routes must have a second member of crew (Guard or OBS) on board before it leaves the BML. Trains can run driver-only until the point where the route diverges from the main line.

Interestingly, this is the exact same agreement I was told ASLEF and GTR had reached back in September, before everything kicked off. At that time, the company agreed in principle then withdrew (after speaking with their DfT masters, naturally) saying it was not operationally viable.

Have any services been cancelled (or curtailed) so far because of this temporary agreement? If so, how many (if any) of those cancellations would have been excluded by (not taken place because of) the "exceptional circumstances" defined by the second agreement put to ASLEF members, had that agreement been accepted?

 

[redbutton]

So how come it's suddenly operationally viable now? I can't see what has changed. Perhaps XDM or maybe someone involved in the talks can explain? If nothing has changed then they did they not do it before? Who stopped them? I suspect I know but I'd like someone to publicly say.

Nothing has changed operationally, except that the drivers are operating the doors rather than the conductors/OBSs. It's not "suddenly" viable, it always was.

Out of interest what is considered the BML for this purpose? Does the Redhill Loop count as part of BML and the short section to Reigate. What about East Grinstead or Horsham? Or do they all need OBS/Guard before transversing?

Fast lines via Quarry and Slow lines via Redhill are both considered the main line as far as I know. None of the branches are included, so for example a Reigate train must have an OBS or Guard by Redhill or it goes no further, a Grinstead service must have one by South Croydon (East Croydon more likely), a Horsham by Three Bridges, et cetera.

It essentially allows the flexibility to get passengers out of London and to a transfer point (to satisfy GTR), without sending single-crewed trains down rural branches to unstaffed halts (to satisfy ASLEF).

I think it's a sensible compromise, and I hope it gets incorporated into a long-term deal.

 

[JamesTT]

It essentially allows the flexibility to get passengers out of London and to a transfer point (to satisfy GTR), without sending single-crewed trains down rural branches to unstaffed halts (to satisfy ASLEF).

I think it's a sensible compromise, and I hope it gets incorporated into a long-term deal.

What about the Thameslink services that are going to be on these routes? If ASLEF say Southern Trains must have an OBS on "branch lines" The dft are surely going to say "hang on a minute" if they agree that Thameslink trains can run without an additional member of staff

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I think it's a sensible compromise, and I hope it gets incorporated into a long-term deal.

It also mirrors the fact that Thameslink trains on the same line do not have an OBS.

 

[pompeyfan]

It also mirrors the fact that Thameslink trains on the same line do not have an OBS.

A signaller earlier today asked a Southern service to examine the line through Southampton tunnel earlier today, asking the guard to sit in the 2nd mans side. Obviously the driver had to politely decline as OBS's don't have valid competency to do so, hence the signaller had to get a long freightliner to go wrong road to check for issues, which in turn caused the up Weymouth to leave 10 minutes late and also caused quite a few other late departures, all those delay minutes in the name of trying to save a few quid.....

 

[infobleep]

There's an election in two days' time, that's what's changed.

But I didn't think railways were high up the agenda?

 

[infobleep]

Nothing has changed operationally, except that the drivers are operating the doors rather than the conductors/OBSs. It's not "suddenly" viable, it always was.



Fast lines via Quarry and Slow lines via Redhill are both considered the main line as far as I know. None of the branches are included, so for example a Reigate train must have an OBS or Guard by Redhill or it goes no further, a Grinstead service must have one by South Croydon (East Croydon more likely), a Horsham by Three Bridges, et cetera.

It essentially allows the flexibility to get passengers out of London and to a transfer point (to satisfy GTR), without sending single-crewed trains down rural branches to unstaffed halts (to satisfy ASLEF).

I think it's a sensible compromise, and I hope it gets incorporated into a long-term deal.

If it was always viable then they should have done it. Utter shambles. Just like the election by the Conservatives.

Given this compromise wasn't allowed last year, despite it being on the table at one stage, I can't see why it will be allowed in the end.

If it is, it will reflect badly on the DfT and government in my eyes. As I said utter shambles.

 

[infobleep]

A signaller earlier today asked a Southern service to examine the line through Southampton tunnel earlier today, asking the guard to sit in the 2nd mans side. Obviously the driver had to politely decline as OBS's don't have valid competency to do so, hence the signaller had to get a long freightliner to go wrong road to check for issues, which in turn caused the up Weymouth to leave 10 minutes late and also caused quite a few other late departures, all those delay minutes in the name of trying to save a few quid.....

Probably a different budget. If it's not, then nothing to see here move along.

 

[Carlisle]

Probably a different budget. If it's not, then nothing to see here move along. ����

Freightliner trains are usually single crewed anyway so how was it able to examine the line that the Southern driver couldn't .?

 

[pompeyfan]

Freightliner trains are usually single crewed anyway so how was it able to examine the line that the Southern driver couldn't .?

Signaller intended to run southern train right line with 2nd man in cab to inspect both up and down at the same time, however wasn't permitted due to lack of compitence, so freightliner had to run wrong road to inspect the up after the Southern had inspected the down.

 

[Carlisle]

Signaller intended to run southern train right line with 2nd man in cab to inspect both up and down at the same time, however wasn't permitted due to lack of compitence, so freightliner had to run wrong road to inspect the up after the Southern had inspected the down.

Thanks for the explanation

 

[Midland Man]

A signaller earlier today asked a Southern service to examine the line through Southampton tunnel earlier today, asking the guard to sit in the 2nd mans side. Obviously the driver had to politely decline as OBS's don't have valid competency to do so, hence the signaller had to get a long freightliner to go wrong road to check for issues, which in turn caused the up Weymouth to leave 10 minutes late and also caused quite a few other late departures, all those delay minutes in the name of trying to save a few quid.....

Is there a local instruction requiring the driver to always be accompanied when examining through Southampton tunnel? (I assume no-one had fallen from the train). Otherwise the second person is not mandatory and the train should not have been delayed waiting for one. That said even an OBS would better than no-one to act as a 'second pair of eyes'. I've never heard of a competency requirement for this assistance - but maybe one has been introduced since my retirement some years ago. In my time any railwayman on the train could assist, regardless of grade, and would have done so.
David

 

[Midland Man]

Signaller intended to run southern train right line with 2nd man in cab to inspect both up and down at the same time, however wasn't permitted due to lack of compitence, so freightliner had to run wrong road to inspect the up after the Southern had inspected the down.

It's not permitted to examine both lines at once in a tunnel!
David

 

[pompeyfan]

It's not permitted to examine both lines at once in a tunnel!
David

I'm only passing on what I was told. This isn't 3rd rate info, it was direct.

It may well be that only the up line needed examining, but the signaller wanted the guard to do it from the 2nd mans side of the down.

 

[ComUtoR]

12 Examining the line

The person responsible: driver
12.1 How to carry out an examination
of the line

If instructed by the signaller to examine the line, you must:

• reach a clear understanding with the signaller as to which portion of line is to be examined
• proceed over the affected portion of the line at caution
• carry out any other instructions.

If the affected portion of line is within a tunnel, you must not exceed 10 mph (15 km/h) through the tunnel. If the signaller has told you that the examination of the line is because of a suspected track defect, you must not exceed 20 mph (30 km/h) over the affected portion of line. You must report the state of the affected line from an agreed location beyond the affected portion of line.

12.3 Being accompanied by a competent person

During darkness, poor visibility, or if the affected portion of line is within a tunnel, while examining the line, you must be accompanied by the guard or other competent person (if one is immediately available).

Competent Person
A person who is passed as being qualified and has the required knowledge and skills to carry out a particular rule, regulation, instruction or procedure.

It is debatable if you could consider an OBS as a 'competent person' I think that part of the issues with the OBS grade is that they aren't considered to be a 'competent person'

 

[Surreytraveller]

even an OBS would better than no-one to act as a 'second pair of eyes'.

Not necessarily. What if the OBS said there was nothing there and there was.

 

[Surreytraveller]

What about the Thameslink services that are going to be on these routes?

Thameslink are Thameslink. Southern are Southern. Different brands with drivers on different contracts with different agreements. As long as we don't start getting Southern drivers on Thameslink services like they did with Gatwick Express.