This is poor reporting - even by RMT standards

[robertclark125]

The RMT wants to go back to British Rail, the company that first introduced DOO...!

BR did introduce DOO, but you can go back even further, to 1968, when the first bit of the Victoria line opened. It was London Underground, then, as now, public sector, and that didn't bother the unions then, so surely, in 49 years, the same safety concerns should exist! If the RMT is kicking up a fuss now, why didn't it in 1968, or when the Jubilee line opened in 1979, or when the first bit of Tyne and wear metro opened in 1980, or when the Glasgow Subway reopened in 1980, all using DOO trains.

If it was a problem with safety now, why wasn't it a problem then?

 

[BestWestern]

BR did introduce DOO, but you can go back even further, to 1968, when the first bit of the Victoria line opened. It was London Underground, then, as now, public sector, and that didn't bother the unions then, so surely, in 49 years, the same safety concerns should exist! If the RMT is kicking up a fuss now, why didn't it in 1968, or when the Jubilee line opened in 1979, or when the first bit of Tyne and wear metro opened in 1980, or when the Glasgow Subway reopened in 1980, all using DOO trains.

If it was a problem with safety now, why wasn't it a problem then?

We can only guess at the decisions made in the political climate of yesterday, but what is certainly true is that today's situation is rather different. Back in the 60s, the 70s or the 80s, the chances of a Guard or Driver ending up in prison after a dispatch incident was far lower than now, where the 'PTI' risk is rightly deemed far more worthy of scrutiny. In the days of old, freely opening slam doors were the norm and the train didn't have to be at a stand for people to be opening them! Nowadays, if something looks remotely iffy during dispatch the job is stopped on pain of prosecution. This is a big part of Aslef's reluctance to accept DOO - remember, it isn't just the RMT.

It's also fair to point out that dispatch procedures on the Underground are very, very different to on the national network, and the inherent risks are far higher. Dispatching a 'big train' under the conditions they see on the Tube would be, quite literally, criminal! This difference in cultures is acknowledged by RAIB and has been mentioned in previous accident reports.

 

[goblinuser]

BR did introduce DOO, but you can go back even further, to 1968, when the first bit of the Victoria line opened. It was London Underground, then, as now, public sector, and that didn't bother the unions then, so surely, in 49 years, the same safety concerns should exist! If the RMT is kicking up a fuss now, why didn't it in 1968, or when the Jubilee line opened in 1979, or when the first bit of Tyne and wear metro opened in 1980, or when the Glasgow Subway reopened in 1980, all using DOO trains.

If it was a problem with safety now, why wasn't it a problem then?

The Victoria Line is a closed system with trains, tunnels, and stations all designed together. Every station has staff to help people. All tickets are sold and checked on stations. As 1967 stock was automatic, the 'train operator' could focus on the doors and dispatch more than speed limits and such.

A guard is not needed on a system like the Victoria line as much as national rail.

 

[robertclark125]

I know that the Victoria Line is a closed system, indeed its only connection to the rest of the tube network is at Finsbury Park. But, you could also look at the Metropolitan Line, which isn't a closed system, and yet DOO was introduced there.

 

[Andyh82]

Because ordinary hard working people are the salt of the earth, until they work too hard and too well at work and get promoted to management, whereupon they become the scum of the earth. RMT logic - absolute hatstands, the lot of them.

I'm not saying unions don't have a place, but everything about the RMT is just so old fashioned and stuck in the 70s. The modern day commuter just can't relate to the situation or the language used.

I'm surprised they don't demand that their members still get paid weekly with actual cash in a brown envelope.

 

[HH]

I'm surprised they don't demand that their members still get paid weekly with actual cash in a brown envelope.

IIRC they did at the beginning of privatisation; it had to be negotiated out.

 

[wingsoveryorks]

Got to say this. I read the account of the recent meeting between the RMT, Merseyrail, and the Labour mayor of Liverpool.

I thought a Liverpool labour mayor might swing their way, until I read the RMT's proposals. Once I had stopped laughing it all became clear why nobody takes them seriously anymore, not even left wing mayors of left wing northern cities can stomach them.

 

[daikilo]

Got to say this. I read the account of the recent meeting between the RMT, Merseyrail, and the Labour mayor of Liverpool.

I thought a Liverpool labour mayor might swing their way, until I read the RMT's proposals. Once I had stopped laughing it all became clear why nobody takes them seriously anymore, not even left wing mayors of left wing northern cities can stomach them.

Whilst I am not surprised, any chance you can send a link to the account you read please, or at least give some examples. It is sad that they appear to be "flogging a dead horse" rather than building a genuine case, assuming there is one.

 

[FordFocus]

BR did introduce DOO, but you can go back even further, to 1968, when the first bit of the Victoria line opened. It was London Underground, then, as now, public sector, and that didn't bother the unions then, so surely, in 49 years, the same safety concerns should exist! If the RMT is kicking up a fuss now, why didn't it in 1968, or when the Jubilee line opened in 1979, or when the first bit of Tyne and wear metro opened in 1980, or when the Glasgow Subway reopened in 1980, all using DOO trains.

If it was a problem with safety now, why wasn't it a problem then?

Times have changed. There wasn't the duty of care culture in the 1980s when it was introduced by BR.

More people using narrow platforms, people who are getting caught in doors and dragged down the platform. TOCs that won't upgrade ancient DOO equipment that's no longer fit for purpose in 2017. CRT screens in sunlight that don't work, trying to dispatch trains with poor platform lighting or DOO mirrors that don't align with the train. Now the CPS and BTP seem very interested in the past 5 years to send drivers or guards to court when it goes wrong. It's never the fault of the infrastructure or person ignoring the hustle alarm to signal the doors are closing.

Away from the platform, the DfT doesn't want any other staff onboard, it's all been put on the driver. The BTP have reported that crime is on the increase because of more anti social behaviour, harassment and in some areas violent crime.

One of the senior BR managers that brought in DOO on the Bedford line in the 80s recently wrote that it was implemented to save money at all costs. Now he regrets the approach because of the affect it's having on the disabled. Southern's DOO farce has proved that they don't give two hoots about the disabled by leaving wheelchairs on platforms because they haven't rostered a second person onboard.

 

[Clip]

BR did introduce DOO, but you can go back even further, to 1968, when the first bit of the Victoria line opened. It was London Underground, then, as now, public sector, and that didn't bother the unions then, so surely, in 49 years, the same safety concerns should exist! If the RMT is kicking up a fuss now, why didn't it in 1968, or when the Jubilee line opened in 1979, or when the first bit of Tyne and wear metro opened in 1980, or when the Glasgow Subway reopened in 1980, all using DOO trains.

If it was a problem with safety now, why wasn't it a problem then?

Well with the RMT being founded in 1990 is very hard to see how they would've been able to kick up a fuss about it really.

 

[Clip]

I know that the Victoria Line is a closed system, indeed its only connection to the rest of the tube network is at Finsbury Park. But, you could also look at the Metropolitan Line, which isn't a closed system, and yet DOO was introduced there.

I think youll find that the vic is connected to more of the tube system than just at Finsbury Park

 

[robertclark125]

You raise some very good points Fordfocus, in response to my earlier post, and there is one bit I would like to respond to, with this; I look forward to the day when the BTP and the CPS (or procurator fiscal in Scotland) takes someone to court for ignoring the hustle alarms.

 

[wingsoveryorks]

Whilst I am not surprised, any chance you can send a link to the account you read please, or at least give some examples. It is sad that they appear to be "flogging a dead horse" rather than building a genuine case, assuming there is one.

This is the piece below. It comes from the 'Liverpool Echo'.

Merseytravel Chief Executive, Frank Rogers said: “Our understanding of what was discussed at the meeting is slightly at odds with that of the RMT.

“We made it clear that there isn’t a one size fits all solution to the issue of DCO. The optimum solution should be determined in relation to the specifics of the network and the vast majority of urban metro networks such as the London Underground, Metrolink in Manchester, Glasgow Underground and the Tyne and Wear Metro have been DCO for over 20 years so the question to the RMT is: why are they continuing to single out our urban metro, Merseyrail and the Liverpool City Region? We are not like ScotRail, Southern, Northern, Greater Anglia etc. we are Merseyrail.”

“Our new trains have been designed specifically for our network, they don’t need guards to operate as the driver controls the doors and dispatches the train. Also, the fact that all our stations are staffed from first to last train, the train design including the sliding step and the platform improvements make this the most accessible network in the UK. Carriage design and CCTV systems significantly improve on-board safety. We are absolutely confident that they will be even safer than the trains they replace.

“Keeping a second member of staff on the train, unnecessarily, will cost over £5m a year or £200m over the life of the new trains - money that could be much better spent on other key priorities across the city region. Interestingly suggestions from the RMT to fund the guards included putting up fares for passengers significantly over and above RPI incremental rises, extending the length of the existing Merseyrail Concession, or asking the Combined Authority to borrow an additional £200m, almost half the total cost of the new trains project - all options that are unpalatable, unworkable and unnecessary."

 

[daikilo]

wingsoveryorks, thanks, as I suggested, "flogging a dead horse" in my opinion.

 

[northwichcat]

“Keeping a second member of staff on the train, unnecessarily, will cost over £5m a year or £200m over the life of the new trains - money that could be much better spent on other key priorities across the city region. Interestingly suggestions from the RMT to fund the guards included putting up fares for passengers significantly over and above RPI incremental rises, extending the length of the existing Merseyrail Concession, or asking the Combined Authority to borrow an additional £200m, almost half the total cost of the new trains project - all options that are unpalatable, unworkable and unnecessary."

Thanks for sharing that. That's very interesting given in January the RMT were at stations doing a protest against fare rises. I wonder if they'll support an end to free staff travel to fund what they call a critical safety role?

 

[hounddog]

I think youll find that the vic is connected to more of the tube system than just at Finsbury Park

I think you'll find it isn't.

Unless you drive the train onto the platform and through the interchange passageways at Euston or Oxford Circus.

 

[Clip]

I was reading it as an interchange for passengers rather than physically

 

[bb21]

do you know anything about them or their life circumstances?

Quite a lot, thank you.

Should anyone in the UK bugger off if they find something about the government to complain about? Perhaps everyone should just roll over like passive lapdogs, yes sir no sir anything you say sir let me kiss your backside sir, please sir. :roll:

Please don't put words in my mouth.

HK has and will always be a part of China. Even "self-determination" is under the condition that HK remains a part of the country, whoever the ruling party is. Whether they wish to recognise the legitimacy of communist rule is irrelevant. The communist party is currently the legitimate ruling party, as recognised internationally.

If they want to change that, they work together with everyone else in the country to try and change that. If they don't want to do that or be part of the country, they can find themselves somewhere else they want to go.

I hope I have made myself clear.

People have always, and will always complain about things they don't like, get used to it.

Where did I say they cannot complain?

Yeah, let's kick out the parts of the population who don't like the Chinese Communist Party's repeated infringements of their historic rights to freedom of speech, press and assembly! I'm sure that those who originally fled Communist rule would love that. :roll:

Again, don't put words in my mouth. :roll:

which the PRC wants to eradicate and replace with Mandarin.

Utter nonsense. One too many conspiracy theory read I think. I wonder what people in Guangdong province speak these days after nearly 70 years of communist rule.

The 'Chinese' language they speak being Cantonese,

If Cantonese is not culturally Chinese, what is it? British? :roll:

I am no more impressed by the communist party's historic antics, but some of you have some very warped and prejudicial understanding of cultural matters.