-
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!
W Driver Only Operated Trains (DOO) discussion
- Thread starter 387star
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
So ASLEF haven't been approached yet about their drivers working DOO on FGW IEP trains, even though FGW couldn't be more explicit about the fact that they want drivers to be doing exactly that on the new trains?
I've got a lot to learn about Union & industrial relations! Thanks for the reply.
ASLEF are very very clear that there will be no further roll out of DOO end of.
Your post seems muddled as to what you think should best happen in this dispute. Suggesting more intense strike action in one sentence then bringing in ACAS etc to try and reach a negotiated solution in the next
Last edited:
I just don't think this dispute is going to be resolved without one or the other of those things happening. Neither side is prepared to budge.
FGW seem content with letting the RMT strike as long as they think they can break the strike by bringing in managers as guards so that they can run as many trains possible without RMT staff. The RMT are entrenched in their position so will continue to hold strikes until all their demands are met.
Either ACAS needs to get involved to get the two sides properly talking, or more intense strike action is needed to properly cripple FGW's ability to run trains during a strike.
Last edited:
I'm still surprised that ACAS aren't already involved as they're usually involved once strike action is seriously being considered not after a strike has already taken place and more are on the horizon!
I think you've summed things up very accurately there , can only wait and see how things turn out I guess .
SWTH
Member
As Captain Chaos noted yesterday, the strike on 29th-31st of August is at the same time as the Reading festival and Notting Hill Carnival. With management usually tied up in other duties to assist with the vast numbers of extra passengers it really throws a spanner in the works for FGW trying to cover for members of staff on strike.
Apparently one of Hitachi's bosses is quoted as saying the spec of the SETs could be changed if needed right up to when they start assembling them next year - I'm told it was in an article in one of the railway comics, can anyone confirm this?
FGW stated that in the event of DOO failure and the driver was unable to dispatch the train then the Train Manager would take over from a panel within the train in the traditional manner of a guard. So that would hint to me that the equipment is already built in ready for a TM to dispatch.
They supposed to be modular in nature to enable changes to their specifications throughout their thirty year lives (change the interior layout, add/remove buffets or kitchens, more tables or less tables and so on and so on). It's why VTEC are easily able to have buffets in theirs. No major redesign was required as the trains were specified to be able to be fitted with them if desired. So I can fully believe that Hitachi would be happy to make an changes right up to the start of assembly and beyond that as and when required.
Would make sense as they're specified of being capable of supporting traditional guard operation (guard open/closes doors) as well as driver/guard (driver opens and guard closes) and full DOO. So it seems logical to simply supply the trains with the equipment necessary especially considering that the VTEC sets will be getting them from the start of operations.
Hypothetical situation.
It is 2018 and the new trains are entering service, agreement has not been reached with the RMT or ASLEF about the DOO but there is a new train ready to leave the station but there is no Train Manager, control inform the driver about the situation and inform him he will be despatched DOO and there should be a TM at Reading. Driver refuses to take the train which is cancelled and the driver is relieved from duty. Now ASLEF are involved and the excrement hits the spinning device big time.
Until ASLEF or their members are actually affected by this DOO decision there isn't any dispute for ASLEF to get involved in.
Or another way is as soon as FGW approach ASLEF officially about the imposition of DOO and there is a fail to agree I am sure there will be a vote taking place, but until they are approached officially they are not in dispute and therefore unable to get involved.
Do you think that is why FGW have not approached ASLEF yet?
They only want to approach ASLEF when the RMT deal is done and ASLEF (and the overpaid/greedy/militant drivers) can be splashed all over the front pages about jot agreeing to work the new trains (probably mentioning our pay 5 times) and are holding the company to ransom etc etc so the general public all support FGW and ASLEF are backed into a corner with the same sort of press releases we are seeing now.
Last edited:
swt_passenger
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 34,308
The train technical specification, which has been in the public domain for years, seems to REQUIRE all normal modes of operation:
+like!!!
The constant rhetoric coming from FGW is 'We cant operate these new trains in the same way as the previous 40 year old stock' which is complete and utter b******t. And yes as soon as ALSEF are involved the usual "overpaid drivers" lines comes out. I believe according to the Daily Fail and Evening Standard we are all paid £60k per year :roll:. Once the first of these extremely expense new trains is cancelled due to lack of train crew because FGW has tried to force through DOO and the driver refuses to take the train hopefully FGW will relent.
Last edited:
LateThanNever
Member
- Joined
- 18 Jul 2013
- Messages
- 1,029
Yes ASLEF need to support guards - but now! Can't all drivers ask particularly awkward questions of the stand-ins? And run a mile when the rsponse is wanting?
In the end I think that the guards need to turn themselves into a specialised profession rather like a CPC for HGV drivers. As I see it, it would have to be mostly classroom based with route knowledge on top of that. That would give guards the flexibilty to move around and I'd like to see a route knowledge requirement of any train being required to carry them for this purpose when thay are not on duty (and that would perhaps be the uncomfortable bit - to progress you might have to do some training unpaid). But I think this system is the most likely to preserve the important job of Guard.
I Have to agree.
Aslef should stop waiting to get put squarely into the argument & wake up & smell the coffee frankly.
This issue absolutely involves Aslefs members and they need to start making their view known rather than waiting for their members to start shouting.
There seem to be a lot of stories about TSSA being satisfied that FGW won't force managers to work as guards but that's exactly what FGW are doing and TSSA are powerless to act because their members don't have the confidence to stand up & say anything even to their own union. TSSA were always known in my time as a manager as 'useless' which is why I stayed with RMT from the time I joined the railway until I left, as did most managers IME.
The junior and middle managers are as much the victims as the guards here -they are bullied/cajoled/'persuaded' into working on strike days despite any protests they might make about their route knowledge etc being woefully inadequate.
After being in a similar situation many years ago (i.e. guards dispute and me & my colleagues being in middle managers positions) I can absolutely identify with the poor sods who have to risk running trains they don't have the proper training to actually run.
FGW are relying on the fact that the likelihood of a major incident being so very rare therefore mean the risk of one of their 'stand in guards' being exposed as '(criminally?) wanting' are equally very low.
i.e. for the laymen here: a guard has crucial duties (which really only start when things go badly wrong (think:ladbroke grove/ufton level crossing) he/she HAS to know the trains safety systems intimately, the areas of track they are running over, the types of signalling there, where the crossover of signalling areas are, what the line speed is, what the junctions/tunnels/cuttings/stations/sidings are and what length they are, what linespeed they are etc etc etc. A guard HAS to know this, he/she has to keep that knowledge up to date also.
Ask yourself -IF it takes up to 6 months to train a guard, including rules & routes AND they need regular re-training/refreshing AND many guards fail or pass very narrowly these rules/routes test despite working the job every day for many months previously -HOW is someone who has never passed these tests before acting as a guard on strike days after a very, very short period?
You make your own mind up, the sad facts are the only way that the real truth will come out as to exactly HOW these people have passed rules/routes checks is if there is a very, very serious incident and the RAIB get involved, then the **** will hit the fan and the Driver will also get asked why they accepted such a poorly trained colleague also.
Myself & my colleagues (at the time) came under extreme pressure (and it wasn't enough to say "I don't want to do this' or 'I cannot see how 2 weeks training will allow me to refresh a complex route like Bristol Tm -Paddington (AND re-do my 'rules'), we were asked/advised several times until we either relented or got clever and managed to forget we'd changed our eye prescription and now didn't have on that was up to date.......
A couple of colleagues just signed off sick or booked holiday rather than being forced to work strike days.
It is very much time that the government should establish independent rules/routes testing by rail track or similar rather than leaving it open to abuse and varying standards.
Aslef should stop waiting to get put squarely into the argument & wake up & smell the coffee frankly.
This issue absolutely involves Aslefs members and they need to start making their view known rather than waiting for their members to start shouting.
There seem to be a lot of stories about TSSA being satisfied that FGW won't force managers to work as guards but that's exactly what FGW are doing and TSSA are powerless to act because their members don't have the confidence to stand up & say anything even to their own union. TSSA were always known in my time as a manager as 'useless' which is why I stayed with RMT from the time I joined the railway until I left, as did most managers IME.
The junior and middle managers are as much the victims as the guards here -they are bullied/cajoled/'persuaded' into working on strike days despite any protests they might make about their route knowledge etc being woefully inadequate.
After being in a similar situation many years ago (i.e. guards dispute and me & my colleagues being in middle managers positions) I can absolutely identify with the poor sods who have to risk running trains they don't have the proper training to actually run.
FGW are relying on the fact that the likelihood of a major incident being so very rare therefore mean the risk of one of their 'stand in guards' being exposed as '(criminally?) wanting' are equally very low.
i.e. for the laymen here: a guard has crucial duties (which really only start when things go badly wrong (think:ladbroke grove/ufton level crossing) he/she HAS to know the trains safety systems intimately, the areas of track they are running over, the types of signalling there, where the crossover of signalling areas are, what the line speed is, what the junctions/tunnels/cuttings/stations/sidings are and what length they are, what linespeed they are etc etc etc. A guard HAS to know this, he/she has to keep that knowledge up to date also.
Ask yourself -IF it takes up to 6 months to train a guard, including rules & routes AND they need regular re-training/refreshing AND many guards fail or pass very narrowly these rules/routes test despite working the job every day for many months previously -HOW is someone who has never passed these tests before acting as a guard on strike days after a very, very short period?
You make your own mind up, the sad facts are the only way that the real truth will come out as to exactly HOW these people have passed rules/routes checks is if there is a very, very serious incident and the RAIB get involved, then the **** will hit the fan and the Driver will also get asked why they accepted such a poorly trained colleague also.
Myself & my colleagues (at the time) came under extreme pressure (and it wasn't enough to say "I don't want to do this' or 'I cannot see how 2 weeks training will allow me to refresh a complex route like Bristol Tm -Paddington (AND re-do my 'rules'), we were asked/advised several times until we either relented or got clever and managed to forget we'd changed our eye prescription and now didn't have on that was up to date.......
A couple of colleagues just signed off sick or booked holiday rather than being forced to work strike days.
It is very much time that the government should establish independent rules/routes testing by rail track or similar rather than leaving it open to abuse and varying standards.
Last edited:
Timbo58, that is an excellent post which puts into perspective the position the <evil> Managers have been put in through no fault of their own.
Thank you for taking the time to compose and post it.
ASLEF cannot get involved until they are in dispute, they cannot get into dispute until they talk with FGW, FGW will not enter into talks with ASLEF despite ASLEF asking several times for talks.
ASLEF have reiterated their position of no extension to DOO and existing DOO schemes to be revisited to see if DOO is still appropriate, that is about all they can do at the moment.
Oh and ASLEF are fully aware of their members feelings about this situation and any talk of extra pay for drivers is a waste of time, the drivers are not interested, you can be sure if that!
Thank you for taking the time to compose and post it.
ASLEF cannot get involved until they are in dispute, they cannot get into dispute until they talk with FGW, FGW will not enter into talks with ASLEF despite ASLEF asking several times for talks.
ASLEF have reiterated their position of no extension to DOO and existing DOO schemes to be revisited to see if DOO is still appropriate, that is about all they can do at the moment.
Oh and ASLEF are fully aware of their members feelings about this situation and any talk of extra pay for drivers is a waste of time, the drivers are not interested, you can be sure if that!
Last edited:
That's something that I'm slight puzzled by. If ASLEF and its members stated position is a firm no to any more DOO and FGW are actively trying to move to that mode of operation then surely they are already in dispute? I'm probably showing my lack of understanding in the intricacies of industrial relations but I don't quite understand why ASLEF have to wait when FGW are already moving to DOO.
Little help please
It's because ASLEF have not been approached so officially they are not aware of the scheme, it's all to do with some of the reasonably new anti union laws that are now in existence, I am certain that ASLEF would like to be standing shoulder to shoulder with the RMT on this (they fullipin better be or ASLEF numbers will go down quite substantially) but their hands are tied until those vital talks take place.
It's all legal crap but unfortunately it's the law.
It's all legal crap but unfortunately it's the law.
Ah so they even though they 'know' what's happening they do not officially 'know' because no-one has officially told them and until some one officially tells them then their hands are tied. Wonderful :roll:
Yep that is it exactly, welcome to 'great' Britain!
I think FGW Snr Mgt probably believe a very attractive pay offer is enough to sway the drivers into accepting DOO so in their eyes they only need to break the RMT and then they can get their way.
ask southern drivers about the extension of doo working, maximum 9 car doo, then the plastic pigs arrive and southern need to run the pigs in multiple, which means 10 cars, that extension seemed to get agreed ok
Sadly you would be surprised what many drivers would agree to in a ballot for a few extra pounds. What they say in the mess room is one thing but what they vote for on private is another. And that's exactly how DOO got through in the first place. It's also how DOO became extended on the southern. Pretty much all drivers sat in the messroom a saying they would never vote for the money over the guards. But the ballot gave a different result...
Southern have only extended DOO themselves in a very minor way during their existence, The vast majority was done under BR with a couple of routes added by Connex (Sutton-Dorking and Brighton main line smaller stations south of Gatwick )
Last edited:
So given this, who is responsible for getting ACAS involved to sort out a dispute? Do one of the disputing parties need to request their assistance (e.g. FGW or RMT) or does the government (e.g. Dft) need to intervene and instruct ACAS to mediate between the parties to settle the dispute?
Surely if this dispute was affecting say, Abellio Greater Anglia, a heavily populated London suburban commuter network, ACAS would've got involved as soon as the first strike was announced?
The fact that there has been no government intervention or at least statements from local (Tory) MPs over this dispute so far speaks volumes doesn't it? After all, the South West's political map is now completely blue.
My fear is that IF both FGW and the RMT are setting themselves up for possibly 2 - 3 years of industrial action until the new SETs are introduced under DOO, when ASLEF can finally get involved (as 455driver hypothetically suggested), by then the damage to the rail industry in the South West & along the South Wales mainline will already be done. Underground workers can strike knowing that they have a captive audience - the vast majority of people can't get around any other way in London than by tube. Passenger numbers won't be hugely damaged by tube strikes in the long term.
If passengers in the Great Western area begin to start thinking that they can't plan journeys ahead or rely on the train to get them places, people who can choose how they travel will start travelling by car and take the M4 / M5 / A30 instead for long distance travel. The 'brand new' GWR franchise will get off to a rotten start, undoing any good FGW want the re-brand to do to their reputation, and passenger numbers in the long term may drop off beyond repair, as people's trust in the reliability of the railways will be gone.
Last edited:
If we had a nationalised or fully privatised system many of these issues in dispute would probably have been negotiated and dealt with quite some time ago but as has been pointed out by many on here before me the short length of most franchises means there's been no incentive for most TOCS to invest all the time effort and money in a long battle with their unions to go DOO until now as DFT have begun specifying these sort of changes in future deals as recommended in the McNulty report
Last edited:
Excuse me but ASLEF are not in charge of running the railway.
THIS is what I am very much afraid will prove to be the truth.
FGW are playing divide & conquer here, if FGW 'win' in this dispute it'll be a simple matter of bribing the Drivers just enough to get the majority not to vote for strike action themselves and the guard is history.
I don't accept FGWs assertion that there will 'more guards' on the trains under DOO not less as anyone can play games with arithmetic and make that statement largely true - 2 guards on busy trains which need lots of ticket checking in the morning will soon allow quite a few trains to run either partially or completely DOO.
Also - bingo! we've got rid of all the spare turns (think about it -there must be at least 6 spare shifts per day at Bristol TM and other major stations will have similar -I'd guess there are 25-30 peoples wages they can save immediately and permanently (circa £900k?) plus all those extras like Sunday working -why pay for overtime you haven't got to cover after all?
They aren't granted, but they do represent the majority of (all?) drivers, without whom the railway ain't going very far at all
- Status