Train drivers forced back to work

[ungreat]

I told him 2 years ago I wasn't working sundays.In fact,I have opted out altogether.So chew on that Mr Know it all.

High fares ain't nothing to do with drivers buddy..that's the greedy company

 

[O L Leigh]

Yes they are, they won't work Sundays because they are trying to get extra pay and conditions. It's nothing to do with 'having a day off' or 'much needed rest' its an attempt to get as much as possible for when Sundays is eventually brought into the working week. There is no problem covering Sundays I suspect, and should there be, they shouldn't have taken the job!

And you've arrived at this conclusion how...?

Someone else has already pointed out that the TOC's have worked out that bringing Sundays into the working week will end up costing them MORE than if they leave things as they are. They don't want Sunday in the working week any more than the drivers do.

Additionally, this action has not been taken over Sunday working. I would respectfully suggest that unless you have an inside line to both sides in this particular story that you have little to no idea what this action is about at all. There is just as much credence in viewing this as a way of staff focussing the TOC's mind on what's important and getting them back to the table with some sensible ideas. This action alone by itself will not secure more pay or preserve conditions except by getting talks going again.

You mention "extra pay and conditions", but I can assure you from experience that this is the impossible dream for rail staff. It's usually one at the expense of the other.

I don't struggle to understand it at all, I know exactly what's going on. It is concerted unofficial action to obtain extra T&Cs and pay. The proof is tell your manager you won't work Sundays!

Well your posts suggest otherwise. You clearly have no concept that on many TOC's Sundays are overtime and that they are therefore completely voluntary. I would have no problem telling my manager I won't work them and it wouldn't land me in any disciplinary trouble at all.

What is beginning to rankle a bit is that the bee that you've got in your bonnet is preventing you from talking about this rationally. You clearly fail to see EMT's role in this action being taken and your arguments keep squirming so that you don't address the points being made to you properly. Discussing this with you is as frustrating and futile as nailing jelly to a tree. Please can you get this straight in your own head before you go anywhere near your keyboard.

**EDIT**

I've just read my Contract of Employment.

Under the heading "Hours of Duty" it states that my hours are 35 hours per week on an 8 week cycle, excluding Sundays. It then goes on to state that I may be requested to work additional time to that rostered. Nowhere in the document does it require me to agree to such a request or set out any reason for me to be disciplined.

O L Leigh

 

[Metroland]

The only way a manager would grant you Sundays off is if it could be covered. It's a great shame (some) railway staff have proven themselves to be completely disinterested in what passengers think, and if I have a bee in my bonnet, that's what its about. You have collectively proven you basically don't give a stuff about anything but internal arguments. Shame on you.

 

[ungreat]

And you have just proved how little you know.We had an opt out of sundays clause a few years back and I did just that.

As for your comment about some rail staff being disinterested in passenger's thoughts,I'll have you know that when I get delayed I walk back into the train and tell each coachfull whats happening,and possibly how long/whats happened etc. Even to the point of sharing my food and water with passengers.I pride myself on doing my job well,but when it comes to safeguarding my job and my family's well being then damn right,I will stand my ground.

 

[O L Leigh]

You have no idea what I think about passengers and service provision, but I will tell you what I do think about your attacks on rail staff.

I am very disappointed that you still clearly fail to understand what is going on here and that you have swallowed the TOC's line so completely. As I've said above, the fact that it's got this far suggests that all is far from well and that the TOC is applying as much pressure to their drivers as they can bring to bear. I and others have patiently explained the situation for you so that you can get a better appreciation, but all we get back in return is hostility. The views that you've expressed are even more rabid than those you will hear from a TOC, and that is why you've got so many people's backs up.

You may be relieved to hear that I'm not taking any of this personally. I'm just getting really annoyed because your posts have begun to take on that evasive air of someone trying their hardest not to be told. You think what you think and damn the rest of us. Well that's fine provided you have a bit of flexibility and are at least slightly open-minded so that we can actually have a proper discussion about it. If you allow your rigid views a little room to bend a bit then perhaps we can talk about this in a more adult fashion.

O L Leigh

 

[Metroland]

You may be relieved to hear that I'm not taking any of this personally. I'm just getting really annoyed because your posts have begun to take on that evasive air of someone trying their hardest not to be told. You think what you think and damn the rest of us. Well that's fine provided you have a bit of flexibility and are at least slightly open-minded so that we can actually have a proper discussion about it. If you allow your rigid views a little room to bend a bit then perhaps we can talk about this in a more adult fashion.

O L Leigh

I know full well, because when I worked for the railways, I asked the very same question as a matter of interest about Sundays and was told if they could not be covered, you would be disciplined. So I asked the RMT on the very matter, and they agreed it was custom and practice to work Sundays. So, its all very well coming out with the patronising rubbish, but it speaks volumes the only people who have their 'backs up' are railway staff, mostly drivers. Now your T&C maybe different (though i doubt it) but it is still unreasonable just to all decide not to work Sundays on unofficial action.

Meanwhile a couple of people I know have their backups because they are going to find it hard going on Sunday going where they want to go, not that anyone seems to care despite the rhetoric. Also I have a record of defending rail staff and the railways on these forums, on many matters, but sometimes you cannot defend the indefensible.

Finally, its not about proving 'I know better', as a regular rail user I am registering my annoyance on the matter, something else which does not seem to have been taken on board, and we read far too much about 'I know my rights', with no apologies, no remorse. I'm not saying EMT are innocent on the matter, but it does take two to tango. Anyway, I've nothing else to say on the subject.

 

[O L Leigh]

Then you've been told wrong. I have known of not one single driver being disciplined for refusing to work a Sunday.

Incidentally, I haven't got my "back up" except over the fact that you seem disinclined to engage properly on this matter. If it makes you feel any better I will agree that this action is most regrettable, but I can also see why such action may be considered necessary.

This isn't just about the drivers, but about the drivers and EMT. It's unfortunate that it's got to the stage where the passengers are getting caught in the middle, but if the TOC had gone a little further in fostering good industrial relations then this whole situation would never had arisen. As I said above (and you ignored, along with many of my other points), most drivers just want a sensible pay increase and to be left alone.

**EDIT**

On the point you have added about what is "reasonable", I would counter by saying that I don't consider it reasonable some of the things that TOC's try to get past their staff (and that's of all grades and not just drivers).

Where I work there are once again jobs under threat. I would personally consider it reasonable to take industrial action to safeguard these people's livings and to protect those conditions of service whose removal would result in a lowering of the safety standard if all the other avenues have been exhausted. I can assure you it's not a decision I would take lightly, but some things are important enough to fight for. Contrary to what you may think or believe about me, is DOES matter to me that by taking such a decision I would be affecting many thousands of other people who have no part in such a dispute, but often times these sorts of actions are the only way to get the talking started again.

As for the manner in which you've registered your annoyance, I am still a little disappointed. Frankly you could have done it without stirring up a sh*tstorm.

O L Leigh

 

[ungreat]

Another load of crud from Metroland.WE HAD AN OPT OUT OF SUNDAYS.I did so.Obviously your contract did not include this.That does not mean other staff work to your conditions as you had them.The reason the backs are up is because some are not obliged to work sundays but you seem to think they should.Do you get that?

Whats indefensible about sticking to your T&C? If you don't have to work sundays what's to defend? Bugger all.Can't be sacked for sticking to your contract!

 

[me123]

I was a CSR for a broadband company about a year ago. I was expected to work plenty of Sundays (about 5 out of every 7 Sundays) exactly the same as every other day of the week with no increased pay. I'm not going into the details of my contract; it is irrelevant and completely different to railway contracts of course. My knowledge of employment law is not good enough to start talking about contracts, and I can't be bothered getting into that side of the debate.

However, the point I am making is that the customers and employers both expected the same treatment on a Sunday as they got Monday-Friday. For that reason, I strongly opposed this action and I am glad that a Sunday service will be restored. Of course rail staff and other people providing a public service have rights the same as all other workers. But it should not interrupt the service; and railway strike action does inconvenience people who often have no other choice to get to where they need to go. In recent action in Scotland (signallers) I know of plenty of people who used holidays and, worse, called in sick to their work because of the lack of services.

I am at no point saying that rail staff do not have rights, but there should always be common sense. These industrial disputes should not under any circumstances impact on the passengers who rely on your service, in my opinion anyway.

 

[Mintona]

I'm not a driver.

But my Sundays are outside the working week. I work as many as I can, but I can turn down any as well. If I (and others) turn it down and it can't be covered, it will be self dispatch from my station at best, or full cancellation of services at worst, although I strongly doubt this will ever happen; everyone around here wants to work Sundays. I would thoroughly not expect to be disciplined for turning a Sunday down, and if I was I would be straight on the phone to my union-rep.

However, if we had a situation similar to EMT, then I would never expect to be told to "work or be sacked, coz plenty of others will do your job" by some guy on a railway forum, and if I was one of the drivers on this board I would be quite upset at you for even incinuating it Metroland.

This isn't about EMT drivers going for more conditions or pay. It is them trying to hold onto conditions they have held for many years.

 

[WillPS]

I think what some people are missing here is understanding on the part of both parties. Obviously East Midlands Trains understand that staff want time off to be with their families at weekends. However, drivers are also being quite unreasonable in my opinion, and not considering the needs of their company - would you want to purposely send your employer down the pan? I think not! Yes, drivers do have a right to Sundays off, but this was clearly a conspiracy amongst drivers to send out a message to or even damage the company. Such actions also damage the industry as a whole, which is not acceptable. I also believe there are procedures for companies to take action against unions for unofficial industrial action, which was clearly the case here.

The whole purprose of industrial action is to send a message to the upper echelons of a company - okay so this wasn't officially industrial action, it was enforcing a contractual obligation, but the point is the same.

There's nothing illegal about declining overtime. Especially in the case of the railways, train drivers have little to worry about in the unlikely event that they did somehow manage to topple the Stagecoach empire anyway!

As mentioned previously, Stagecoach COULD end this possibility but it would cost a lot of money one way or another - they have chosen not to, and frankly they can't have their cake AND eat it.

blah blah blah

Your attidude stinks, smacks heavily of selfishness and is particularly short sighted. Forget about your "rights as a passenger", how about drivers and their right to work effectively in a safety critical environment? Would you like your train to be operated heavily overworked drivers? I don't like the idea of it, not one bit.

I don't like your 'I AM THE CUSTOMER' arguement - it carries little weight, these people are employees of a company expecting something they do not agree with. It is their well built up and defended right to disagree with their employer, and removing goodwill is a good measure to begin with.

I've worked in a company where overtime went from being appreciated to expected - so we removed our goodwill and worked our contracted hours, no union, nothing illegal about that. The company was a toy shop, and as it approached Christmas time the company could no longer afford to have no staff to keep the shop open and had to employ more staff to deal with the problem, which was what was needed all along any way!

 

[O L Leigh]

These industrial disputes should not under any circumstances impact on the passengers who rely on your service, in my opinion anyway.

All good points, but I must take issue with this one.

While I agree with the principle and would always hope that the service is not affected by industrial action, removing the right to take such action upsets the balance of industrial relations. To save typing out again what I've said on this matter on a previous occasion, I've quoted what I wanted to say below.

While appreciate that you consider any form of action to be holding the public to ransom, what has to be understood is that there has to be a bulwark against the full excesses of the privatised rail companies. This is actually a useful function of the unions and, occasional strike days aside, is something that generally benefits the public.

When rail staff are reported to be in dispute over pay, what is unfortunately lost in the fog is that these negotiations are usually about pay and conditions. It's these conditions that govern things like rest periods and times of booking on and off, all of which ensure that staff are properly rested and fit to be in control of a train. These are important safety considerations that should be obvious to everyone. However, the TOC's don't like giving something for nothing which means that almost every pay offer made will be subject to "strings". Without strong staff representation we would have no way of fighting this erosion of our conditions of service and it's unavoidable impact on railway operations.

As a driver myself, I can attest that conditions are the most important thing to protect. The job is physically and socially arduous enough with the ever changing shift patterns and 0500 starts without making things even harder for ourselves. I'd rather be offered a sensible pay increase with no "strings" rather than have the company chip away at my conditions until they reach a point where the job becomes impossible.

I'm sorry that you feel you've been held to ransom by EMT's drivers, but I hope that reading this thread has given you the opportunity to see both sides of the situation. There really is no need for EMT to change their Sunday working arrangements if only they could foster better industrial relations with their staff.

If we remove the right to take industrial action we hand the incentive squarely to the TOC's and give them the mandate to do whatever they please. My objection to this is twofold.

Firstly, as an employee, I don't want my job to become harder or take over the rest of my life any more than it already has because it won't be just me that suffers the effects. Secondly, and more importantly, there are conditions that TOC's want to get rid of in order to increase productivity and make savings that will adversely affect safety. As rail users I would hope that you can see the sense in this stance.

We are actually lucky that most disputes are resolved without the need to take disruptive action, and that would always be my favoured solution. I don't want to have to go out on strike, but equally I understand that the right to do so is crucial to ensuring that the job remains physically possible and the railways remain safe.

O L Leigh

 

[Mintona]

Good posts O L Leigh. Exactly what I was thinking but you put it so much better than me

 

[Metroland]

Your attidude stinks,... Forget about your "rights as a passenger"....I don't like your 'I AM THE CUSTOMER' arguement - it carries little weight, these people are employees of a company

Yep. It speaks volumes about these hard pressed drivers on 35 hours a week, let's hope the passengers don't go on strike eh? Yes folks, railway employees really are like this, everything you have read is true. Actually, i know that's not the case, but please remember who could be reading these forums.

 

[O L Leigh]

Selective quoting again. Go on, give the pot another good stir.

This thread contains some very good points for and against the need to take industrial action when all other means have been exhausted. We could have ourselves a really good discussion if only you would take it seriously.

**EDIT**

Actually, you've finally had a really good idea. If the passengers all decided not to travel in support of the drivers fight against the erosion of their conditions (I'm assuming at this point that you've read my post above outlining why this is a bad thing for rail users as well as rail staff), that would send a far more powerful message to the TOC in question.

O L Leigh

 

[First class]

Metroland - grow up!

You're pathetic, and clearly hold a grudge against railway employees. What? You jealous of our high earnings? Privs? long days in all weather? the abuse we get from passengers who think we're wrong, when actually they're wrong?

We are employees of a PRIVATE company. Nobody is asking for a change of conditions, other than EMT. Drivers are using their own contractual rights to reject overtime. That's not their fault- that's not their family's fault- that's not the passengers fault. It is clearly a problem with the Management.

If you feel the railway is full of rude employees, then have a look in the mirror, read your posts and think why some staff may feel that way.

These drivers aren't refusing to do anything. They're just knocking overtime back, happens in any other company. You're blaming staff for adhering to their terms and conditions. Somehow that makes every member of railway staff rude...

You can't say because a train driver earns more money that somehow (s)he should have inferior rights. That is:
a) possibly illegal
b) discrimative

My financial status means I'm paying 40% tax. Depending on the market, this could rise to the 50% tax rate. Now giving £80,000 in tax freaks me out. Drivers may earn £35k, but they're taking home only £20,000 basic. I don't know about you, but that's pretty rubbish. They're not so elite as you think.

I think you've been backed into a corner with lots of forum members in disagreement with you. Nobody is keeping you in that corner. Just shut up and chill out

 

[WillPS]

Yep. It speaks volumes about these hard pressed drivers on 35 hours a week, let's hope the passengers don't go on strike eh? Yes folks, railway employees really are like this, everything you have read is true. Actually, i know that's not the case, but please remember who could be reading these forums.

I'm disappointed, but not surprised you have chosen to omit the vast majority of my post, thereby taking my argument out of context and thus making me seem irrational.

I advise that if you are unable to address all (or any) of the points raised by myself, O L Leigh and everybody else you've misquoted, you do not in future attempt to appear to be responding directly to us.

To all reading the posts of Metroland,
May I cordially suggest you click the blue button on the posts he quotes so that you can read the posts in full.

 

[EM2]

I work for Network Rail but a number of my colleagues (not drivers, I should add) are ex-Midland Mainline, and are still on their MML contracts. Again, they are not required to work Sundays, many of them don't and no disciplinary action has been taken against them.
Even when a manager has made a mistake and they have been put on the day's roster and not turned up, no blame is attached to them BECAUSE THEY DON'T WORK SUNDAYS.
If your contract says that Sunday is outside the working week, and any Sunday working is worked as overtime, you cannot be disciplined for not working a Sunday.

 

[jagardner1984]

I think you have just hit the nail on the head. They don't have to work Sundays, but Sundays are a part of many peoples working week, and even more peoples leisure time. I'd love to have every Sunday off, but that's just not the modern world. Maybe that's unfortunate,, but it's life. I try to work only 6 days of 7, and fail to see what's unreasonable about seeing Sunday as part of the week. Maybe a compromise would be to have either saturday or sunday off ?

 

[Metroland]

Metroland - grow up!

You're pathetic, and clearly hold a grudge against railway employees. What? You jealous of our high earnings? Privs? long days in all weather? the abuse we get from passengers who think we're wrong, when actually they're wrong?

We are employees of a PRIVATE company. Nobody is asking for a change of conditions, other than EMT. Drivers are using their own contractual rights to reject overtime. That's not their fault- that's not their family's fault- that's not the passengers fault. It is clearly a problem with the Management.

Well okay, if these companies are truly private, let's withdraw all the subsidy and they can stand on their own two feet. Vast amounts of tax payers money are paid into the system to provide a service passengers want, not a service the employees want. That isn't my opinion, that is the opinion of the vast majority of hard working people.

I'm not jealous at all, I just dislike the culture of entitlement which leads some employees to clearly think that can set the rules and just decide not bother turning up Sunday. There are reasons to take industrial action, there are reasons to stop work because of safety. In my opinion, this isn't one of them - and by the looks of it the High Court agree, this is why they granted the injunction. EMT drivers are no different from drivers of any other TOC or NR staff. But they clearly have a problem with management and feel its their 'right' to take out out on the rest of us.

First thing is, I'd like to see a train divers license, and a common cab signalling system to open up the tracks where route knowledge is not required - both those things are already happening and not before time. Let's open up the grade to the real world shall we, see how far you get. I bet I can find the replacement drivers in a day.They would NEVER get away with this in road transport or Aviation. I know full well MOST railway employees do not have this disgraceful attitude, but passengers need safeguards to stop them being held to ransom.

It is not the real world to suddenly decide not to work a certain day of the week when passengers expect a service, whether it's inside or outside direct contract terms. Remember the MPs? They just stated 'We were within the rules'. Don't you get it, it's not the point? Nevertheless it is not cut and dry, and indeed the High Court as deemed the action Unlawful.

==================

This is the opinion of ASLEF:

Dear Member

We write further to the letter of 15 May 2009, which was sent pursuant to an Order of the High Court.

As that letter explained, ASLEF and EMT are currently in disagreement as to whether drivers have a contractual duty to work on Sundays when rostered. EMT have recently confirmed that there is no wish on their part to force drivers to work Sundays and they envisage a continuation of the current local arrangements by which cover is invariably available for drivers who do not wish to work a rostered turn on a Sunday.

Irrespective of the contractual disagreement, the Union encourages members to work normally on Sundays.

ASLEF emphasise that:

* at no stage have ASLEF, its officials and representatives issued an instruction to members not to work normally on Sundays;
* ASLEF endorse and repeat the contents of the joint letter of 15 May 2009; and
* ASLEF, its officials and representatives do not seek to induce or procure any of EMT’s employees to breach their contracts of employment.

As stated above, ASLEF encourages its members to work normally on Sundays so that there should be no unnecessary disruption to Sunday service to the public. Further ASLEF encourages drivers to volunteer to work this Sunday to assist EMT in running an effective Sunday service should there be any shortage of rostered or starred drivers.

Yours sincerely

Steve Grant - Acting General Secretary

Michael Whelan - District Organiser'

http://www.aslef.org.uk/information/113020/sunday_working_on_east_midlands_trains/

This is the opinion of EMT

East Midlands Trains has announced plans to run a reduced train service on Sunday 31 May due to the ongoing situation with ASLEF drivers making themselves unavailable for work on Sundays.

Tim Shoveller, Managing Director for East Midlands Trains explains: “We know that this current situation is unacceptable, and confusing for our passengers, particularly as we have a good track record of running Sunday services.”

The company will run 16 trains each way to London from Leicester on Sunday, with some services serving Derby and Sheffield and a connecting service from Nottingham. Eight trains will be operating on the Nottingham to Skegness line. Replacement bus services will be provided on other local routes.

The current arrangements regarding Sunday working for drivers were inherited by East Midlands Trains at the start of its franchise from the previous train operators (Midland Mainline and Central Trains). Under these arrangements, ASLEF and their members are expected to work on Sundays.

Tim continues: "We have previously managed to run our Sunday services without any difficulties and, under normal circumstances, do not have a shortage of available drivers. Sunday is a normal travel day for our passengers and we believe the people who deliver our rail services should treat it as such.

"That’s why we are extremely concerned that a large number of drivers have failed to work normally on Sundays this month. It is our belief that this action has been orchestrated to influence on-going drivers' pay negotiations being conducted with the drivers’ trade union, ASLEF, and is therefore unlawful industrial action.

]"After it became clear that for the second week running (Sunday 17 May), the majority of our drivers were again making themselves unavailable for work, we took legal action against ASLEF to prevent further unnecessary disruption for our passengers. We were forced to take this serious step to protect our passengers. A High Court Judge supported our position and granted an injunction against ASLEF to prohibit further unlawful industrial action and to encourage drivers to work normally on Sundays.

“In light of the injunction, we fully expected the union to ensure its members worked normally on following Sundays. However, it is clear that this has not happened and our passengers are now facing further disruption caused by yet more unlawful industrial action this Sunday.

"This is not a situation of our making, but we agree with our passengers that it is completely unacceptable. As a result, we are continuing to meet with ASLEF and exploring all other potential options, including further legal action, to address the situation and protect our passengers. They have a right to expect reliable train services seven days a week and we cannot allow unlawful industrial action to undermine crucial public transport services."

http://www.eastmidlandstrains.co.uk...erunlawfulindustrialactionbyASLEFdrivers_.htm

 

[Ferret]

Route knowledge not required?! So cab signalling tells the driver when to put the brake in to stop at Kettering does it?! Metroland, you really need to think before you post because you're efforts so far a coming across as the delusional rantings of a madman!!!

The drivers aren't setting the rules, they are following the rules that exist in the form of their contractual obligations. As I've already explained to you ad nauseum, if EMT are to provide the service taxpayers expect then they'll have to negotiate a settlement with ASLEF. Regardless of any disharmony at EMT, the current system won't always be able to provide that as drivers aren't obliged to work Sundays. They need to find a way of getting Sundays into the working week and to do so will mean that taxpayer subsidy will have to be diverted from the pockets of the directors and shareholders to the pockets of the drivers. Whether you agree with that or not matters not one jot - it's the reality and you need to accept it.

 

[Metroland]

Route knowledge not required?! So cab signalling tells the driver when to put the brake in to stop at Kettering does it?!

Not only do modern cab systems tell the driver when to put the brake on, it even puts the brakes on for them!

The drivers aren't setting the rules, they are following the rules that exist in the form of their contractual obligations.

Clearly the High court and management disagree and so do I, despite me patronised and told I'm wrong by people that don't know what they are taking about.

They need to find a way of getting Sundays into the working week and to do so will mean that taxpayer subsidy will have to be diverted from the pockets of the directors and shareholders to the pockets of the drivers.

Why? What makes EMT drivers think they deserve it instead of investors or passengers, or other railway employees?

 

[delt1c]

managment have the benefit of spin by the media, the staff dont have the same support. Staff are not breaking anylaws, they are mearly working to the employment set by managment. The culprit has to be managment here , they have set targets which they cannot meet..

 

[Metroland]

managment have the benefit of spin by the media

Nothing to do with spin, one of the highest courts in the land have ruled drivers ARE breaking the law, and those that are supporting them are supporting breaking the law, which is why they DO NOT have union backing.

 

[Ferret]

Metroland, it's most amusing to hear you tell several experienced (and current) railway employees that we don't know what we're talking about! Totally laughable.

With regard to the High Court Injunction - as I said at the beginning, where the drivers themselves are concerned it isn't worth the paper it's written on! It's an injunction against ASLEF - it doesn't prevent drivers acting unilaterally and declining to work as per their contracts of employment. This is just idle speculation on my part but I suspect that getting that injunction has only made matters worse - the drivers may well dig their heels in!

To answer your question regarding remuneration for drivers, it's because the law (this time employment law) of which you are so keen on referring to states that you should not be forced to work overtime.

And going back to cab signalling, I presume it carries out the instructions of rulebook module M1 does it? The whole notion of drivers without route knowledge is completely ludicrous and is yet another example of your naivete..

 

[Metroland]

Metroland, it's most amusing to hear you tell several experienced (and current) railway employees that we don't know what we're talking about! Totally laughable.

If only you knew You aren't a lawyer, but then nor am I. However, when the high court rules the action is illegal I think that carries some weight, don't you?

 

[O L Leigh]

I thought you'd had your final say on the matter...?

The problem here is that you're quoting only what has been said publicly by EMT and ASLEF, and as sure as eggs is eggs these statements are almost certainly only tangentially related to the issues going on within EMT. With respect, we STILL don't actually know precisely what this dispute is about and the only way to know is to talk directly to the people in the middle of it.

As for your latest ideas, they are frankly preposterous. In-cab signalling does not constitute automatic train operation, and even if it did there would still need to be a driver fully conversant with the rules, the route and the traction. What if there is an incident or the driver needs to report trespassers or an obstruction on the line? It's not going to be much help if the driver hasn't the first clue where he/she is.

I'm not sure that the High Court necessarily disagree, as I'm sure EMT made a good show of presenting their case. However, it smacks of double-standards that the TOC is saying on the one hand that they have no wish to make Sunday working compulsory (although the fact that they are in disagreement with ASLEF over this point suggests that this may not be entirely true) but then going to the High Court to secure an order (not an injunction) to ensure that drivers do just that. I find this very revealing and can't help but wonder if this is an example of the curtain having been lifted just a little bit and allowing the rest of us a peek inside.

To take up Ferret's point about the cost of bringing Sunday into the working week. I believe that point has already been adequately covered earlier in this thread. You really should go back and look at it.

I had hoped with the benefit of a good night's sleep you would have had the chance to reflect and think further on this. Unfortunately it would seem not. Indeed, we seem to be having the same discussions all over again and you still seem unwilling to concede that there is another side to this. Last night you criticised rail staff of failing to see the problems disruptive action causes to rail users, and yet you continue to fail to even acknowledge what rail staff are trying to achieve. Even where you have been proven to be factually incorrect you stubbornly insist that you are right.

This really does surprise me because before this you have always presented yourself as a sane, rational person generally in-tune with the railways. However, the answers to all the points you are continuing to raise have already been given. You can argue black is white all day if you so wish but, and I'm truly sorry to have to say this, your uncharacteristic total intransigence and lack of insight will only serve to wind people up.

If only you knew You aren't a lawyer, but then nor am I. However, when the high court rules the action is illegal I think that carries some weight, don't you?

...and this is an example of what I've just been talking about. It is not illegal to decline overtime.

In any case, just who was this injunction taken against and what does it prevent them from doing? I suspect it's against ASLEF to prevent them from endorsing non-official action. This is not the same thing as an injunction against the drivers themselves to prevent them declining their Sundays. If it was we should all be rightly furious as it would set a dangerous precedent.

O L Leigh

 

[Metroland]

O L Leigh, you lost all credibility when you proposed passengers would support action so drivers can have a day off on Sunday. Believe me, passengers don't care.

Whatever the issues, it speaks volumes the union won't support it. Justify to me it is morally right drivers to suddenly decide they are all having Sundays off, then I might start to listen. It doesn't take a genius to work out its an attempt to grab as much as possible, certainly nothing to do with safety, or wanting to 'be with their families'.

 

[O L Leigh]

Then he who shouts loudest wins.

Metroland: It pains me to say this but you've just lost my respect. I thought we were all adult enough to keep this above the level of personal insult, but clearly not. You have worn me down beyond the point of endurance with your pig-headedness. It's no wonder you're having trouble hearing and understanding what other people are saying to you when your head is so far up your own backside.

Please don't infer that I am conceding that you are right, as I will steadfastly maintain that you are not. I am just tired of your arrogance and have much better things to do than spend my day arguing with you. It's been an experience that perfectly illustrates the saying: "Never argue with idiots. They just drag you down to their level and beat you with experience."

Or perhaps you've just run out of arguments. You've ignored almost every point I've raised in preference to your ill-informed histrionics.

O L Leigh

 

[Ferret]

Metroland, the point is that you know that myself and a few others that have engaged in this discussion are railway employees and are highly likely to be able to provide an insight into how this unwanted situation with Sundays has come about. But yet, you accuse us of not knowing what we're talking about - surely you must understand the crassness of your position there?!

You need to draw the distinction between the High Court saying that ASLEF coordinating unofficial action is illegal and drivers being told that refusing overtime is illegal. To make it completely clear, the former is correct, the latter is not!!!