RMT settle dispute with Greater Anglia

[Dave1987]

"Technology minded people" (do you mean "technically"?) generally end up being machine minders on the railways. I am a very technically minded railway worker, very much "in the thick of it" when it comes to new stuff being introduced, and yet I spend a sizeable chunk of each working day fixing stuff. That applies whether it's dealing with commercial issues (new TIS, new payment methods or TVM issues) or rolling stock (PIS operation, other facilities such as toilet modules or HVAC, or more serious fundamentals such as traction issues) or stations (dispatch, lighting, staff information).

The railway has a very "interesting" habit of deploying stuff which isn't quite ready, in fact it always has - and then the rule books "get written in blood" based on past accidents, in order to ensure faults and failures are dealt with properly. This applies as much to getting the machines to be compliant as anything else. I don't see train crew responsibilities drifting away from either high levels of training need, or major troubleshooting, for years to come.

On the other hand, I am always happy to see things being improved. There are huge numbers of dedicated people who will spot a flaw and actually try to do something about it. A bit more co-ordination wouldn't go amiss, but the railway has the talent there. It may just not be used in the way you think...

Luddite!

 

[Islineclear3_1]

I will mark his words. An automated railway has a grand future. There will still be jobs for technology minded people, but not for machine minders.

With relevance to another industry that I have a hand in, technology and machines have replaced people (mainly to cut costs) but the machines are nowhere as good as the people and certain insiders of this industry have expressed their concerns

There are many people roles that cannot be replaced by a machine or computer

 

[HH]

GA have been sending middle management on short courses to train them as 'conductors' for the last few months. They seem confident they can provide cover for most services, including the locals.

I hear that they have been going much further North than East Anglia for some of these managers...

 

[Sleepy]

:roll: Just seen ops director weasel type on BBC Look East admitting Greater Anglia guard dispute likely to turn into Southern type long haul dispute ! Dft interference much ???

 

[craigybagel]

Using managers as guards is going well...

https://www.rmt.org.uk/news/rmt-alerts-mps-and-safety-regulator-over-greater-anglia/

RMT alerts MPs and Safety Regulator to “potentially catastrophic incidents”.

RMT has written to MP’s and the rail safety regulator alerting them to two incidents this morning where Greater Anglia’s decision to put strike breaking before safety could have had potentially catastrophic consequences.

The first was the 0510 Norwich to Sheringham service where, despite the signal being at red, the Person Utilised as a Guard (PUG) gave two bells for the train to leave Cromer station. It was only because the driver noticed the error that the train did not past the red signal and an accident was avoided.

The second incident was on the 0615 Colchester to Ipswich service where astonishingly the driver became aware that the Person Utilized as a Guard (PUG) did not know where to operate the door key switch, as a result the driver, unlike Greater Anglia, put passenger safety first and refused to continue the service.

The union has stressed that these are only those incidents that have been bought to our attention so far and have asked that as well as investigating these shocking failures the safety regulator publicise all the incidents have been reported on strike days.

RMT General Secretary Mick Cash said:

“RMT has warned that Abellio Greater Anglia are putting strike breaking before safety and these two incidents have confirmed our fears. A train passing a red signal or carrying passengers where staff do not even have basic knowledge of train door mechanisms could both have had potentially catastrophic consequences.

“These are only the incidents we are aware of so far and we have deep concerns that Greater Anglia are playing fast and loose with passenger safety. We are asking that the safety regulator demands of the company full disclosure of all safety incidents that have been reported during strike action.

“Instead of strike breaking Abellio Greater Anglia should be deal making.”

Ends

Granted, there's a little bit of hyperbole going on here - TPWS would almost certainly have stopped the train at Cromer before there was any accident but it's still worrying. The second incident however is simply astonishing.

 

[theking]

Doesn't the driver have ultimate responsibility for signals anyway whether a guard says dispatch is safe?

 

[LowLevel]

Doesn't the driver have ultimate responsibility for signals anyway whether a guard says dispatch is safe?

Dispatchers and guards if provided are equally mandated by the rulebook to check for a proceed aspect.

As for the second incident I hope whoever passed the individual concerned as competent finds themselves down the Jobcentre shortly.

 

[Carlisle]

As for the second incident I hope whoever passed the individual concerned as competent finds themselves down the Jobcentre shortly.

Wouldn’t Colchester to Ipswich be DOO anyway, as it’s shown as a class 321 emu operating that service

 

[LowLevel]

Wouldn’t Colchester to Ipswich be DOO anyway, as it’s shown as a class 321 emu operating that service

No, 12 car trains have guards.

 

[Carlisle]

No, 12 car trains have guards.

Ok cheers my mistake

 

[LowLevel]

Covering themselves with glory today. I hear on the jungle telegraph they've had another 5 minute wonder see themselves away 2 minutes early from a mandatory dispatch station without the platform staff :roll:

 

[YorkshireBear]

Using managers as guards is going well...

https://www.rmt.org.uk/news/rmt-alerts-mps-and-safety-regulator-over-greater-anglia/



Granted, there's a little bit of hyperbole going on here - TPWS would almost certainly have stopped the train at Cromer before there was any accident but it's still worrying. The second incident however is simply astonishing.

The first one guards have done themselves plenty of times. Wouldn't have that problem on DCO. Hardly a point worth making from them.

The second is more legitimately concerning.

 

[weastebusdepot]

Granted, there's a little bit of hyperbole going on here - TPWS would almost certainly have stopped the train at Cromer before there was any accident but it's still worrying. The second incident however is simply astonishing.

It's only astonishing if you actually believe it to be true!

 

[LowLevel]

It's only astonishing if you actually believe it to be true!

The train was cancelled which suggests something certainly happened.

 

[craigybagel]

The first one guards have done themselves plenty of times. Wouldn't have that problem on DCO. Hardly a point worth making from them.

The second is more legitimately concerning.

If that had been a real guard, it would be treated as a very serious matter - they wouldn't be working any trains for a while put it that way. Yes guards have done it, but it doesn't make it ok. And how many guards have done it on their first Morning on the job?

 

[LAX54]

It's only astonishing if you actually believe it to be true!

more than once today too !

 

[LowLevel]

Covering themselves with glory today. I hear on the jungle telegraph they've had another 5 minute wonder see themselves away 2 minutes early from a mandatory dispatch station without the platform staff :roll:

The same train then had it's door released on the wrong side at it's terminus and passengers alighted.

 

[embers25]

The same train then had it's door released on the wrong side at it's terminus and passengers alighted.

Which also happened on GTR the other day where there wasn't a platform so was far more dangerous and so do we ban all GTR drivers too for the same reason the RMT will be wanting to do to PUGs.

 

[craigybagel]

Which also happened on GTR the other day where there wasn't a platform so was far more dangerous and so do we ban all GTR drivers too for the same reason the RMT will be wanting to do to PUGs.

You could always add a (qualified, competent) guard to GTR services as well?

 

[LowLevel]

Which also happened on GTR the other day where there wasn't a platform so was far more dangerous and so do we ban all GTR drivers too for the same reason the RMT will be wanting to do to PUGs.

I wasn't aware that there is a platform on the none platform facing side of platform 1 at Ipswich? Looks like a drop to the deck and then the car park wall to me.

There has been a significant number of incidents today on GA (I'm sure the RMT will be gleefully giving the exact (known) numbers shortly - I say known because mysteriously Anglia's staff suddenly get a 404 error when trying to access their logs) but as someone who has to share the railway network with these people I find it very concerning that someone can be allowed out on a train, start by committing a dispatch irregularity and leave early from a station, and having not been relieved, finish the same journey by opening the doors on to a drop to the cess.

 

[Sprinter153]

but as someone who has to share the railway network with these people I find it very concerning that someone can be allowed out on a train, start by committing a dispatch irregularity and leave early from a station, and having not been relieved, finish the same journey by opening the doors on to a drop to the cess.

...and will they end up on a CDP or in front of a safety panel? Will they hell.

I have a colleague who was quite severely dealt with after dispatching with a door open (resting against the catch).

Two weeks later a contingency guard dispatched with two doors open and was completely exonerated.

 

[LowLevel]

I need to once again reiterate that I am not per sé against the use of what Anglia are calling PUGs. I expect the company to attempt to go about their business during an industrial dispute. However the same as the driver and other safety critical staff, their safety case specifies a training regime for a train guard.

I believe vehemently that they should NOT be permitted to deviate from the training regime for a train guard, with the exception of the removal of the revenue section if they don't wish them to undertake those duties. They should undertake the same training, mentoring and settling in period as any other guard because that is what they are and they carry the same responsibility to the travelling public.

If that means it is more difficult economically for the company to train them then that is hard luck - you're either acting as the train's guard or not. They are the only reason for not putting them through full training - money and time. Instead you get crap like not working a train between signing off and being chucked in on a train load of commuters and then forgetting how to key in to the doors.

I have had similar people travelling on my trains before and I've always helped them to learn because I can't prevent them undertaking their duties but I do, believe it or not, genuinely care enough about the railway and safety of those on it not to stand by and watch while they make mistakes or learn wrong because I wouldn't be able to live with myself if that person hurts someone.

 

[dk1]

To say I am beyond belief at what I have read in the control log today would be an understatement. We don't usually see this many 'operational incidents' involving conductors in many months as I have seen today. Even though we where expecting some incidents nobody expected it to be on this scale. Shameful.

 

[Joe Paxton]

To say I am beyond belief at what I have read in the control log today would be an understatement. We don't usually see this many 'operational incidents' involving conductors in many months as I have seen today. Even though we where expecting some incidents nobody expected it to be on this scale. Shameful.

I have read suggestions that all sort of incidents that (rightly or wrongly) may well not get logged on a normal day do end up getting logged on days like this (i.e. when managers are filling in for guards).

 

[dk1]

I have read suggestions that all sort of incidents that (rightly or wrongly) may well not get logged on a normal day do end up getting logged on days like this (i.e. when managers are filling in for guards).

Every incident would be logged on a normal day. This certainly wasn't a normal day.

 

[HLE]

All set for Thursday then......

 

[embers25]

I wasn't aware that there is a platform on the none platform facing side of platform 1 at Ipswich? Looks like a drop to the deck and then the car park wall to me.

Still not as dangerous as a live track with a live third rail, though I do agree still worrying. My point was that you didn't hear a dicky bird from the unions about the GTR screw up. Just looking at one other line the guard dispatching with a red signal happens at Honiton happens more than it should (despite the lack of the train the other way being a pretty good clue for the guard).. whether recorded or not. Trains leaving stations early also occur quite a bit at Tisbury westbound and Pinhoe eastbound (before someone checks RTT or the like neither Tisbury nor Pinhoe record accurately (for example the 1406 to Exeter on Monday did not leave Tisbury at 1402 but at 1405.

 

[TMD Tom]

Would RAIB be notified of the incident at Ipswich? It seems to satisfy the requirement for reporting considering it is an incident which under slightly different circumstances might have led to a death or serious injury.

 

[HH]

I'd be rather worried if I were a GA Director. When you have a lot of incidents, it's only a question of time before one becomes serious.

They should cancel a few trains rather than let those responsible for incidents on Tuesday back onto trains for Thursday.

 

[74A]

Would RAIB be notified of the incident at Ipswich? It seems to satisfy the requirement for reporting considering it is an incident which under slightly different circumstances might have led to a death or serious injury.

I doubt it. Its a fairly common occurrence that doors are opened in the wrong place when stopping short etc.