Southern DOO: ASLEF members vote 79.1% for revised deal

[JamesTT]

I just don't see how a better outcome will be achieved? Send their reps back in to negotiate from a weakened position...

Unless of course an improved a slightly improved offer was negotiated in the week long talks. Offer one is presented which ASLEF expect their members to reject. Offer is rejected and talks resume. The already tweaked offer is presented. Members vote it through thinking this is the best we are going to achieve

 

[a_c_skinner]

I don't see what the RMT can salvage assuming the ASLEF deal is accepted. The employer's side will simply sit it out. For as long as it takes. I also don't see how this cannot permeate through the rest of the TOCs allowing for the differences in operating circumstances. I simply don't see how they can snatch victory from this one.

 

[313103]

This is just throwing away their members' money.

How do you work that one out, when it was the members not the executive of the union who voted for industrial action. So your actually wrong in saying they are throwing away their members money.

 

[JamesTT]

How do you work that one out, when it was the members not the executive of the union who voted for industrial action. So your actually wrong in saying they are throwing away their members money.

When you voted to strike were you expecting to be striking for potentially 29 days though?

 

[Barn]

How do you work that one out, when it was the members not the executive of the union who voted for industrial action. So your actually wrong in saying they are throwing away their members money.

They might have voted for the original dispute, but they don't vote for each strike day, and before each strike it is the executive which has to calculate the 'value for money' of the strike day.

 

[313103]

When you voted to strike were you expecting to be striking for potentially 29 days though?

When i have voted in a ballot that involved taking strike action i have understood that it could be over in a matter of days or that it could be indefinitely or that just a threat of strike action could be enough.

Voting is something that should not be done lightly, one should think of the possible consequences should you vote for strike action, if you just vote yes for strike action as just a protest vote but you dont really want to go through with it why vote YES then? One should just void their ballot paper, or vote NO or do what vast swathes of people do in this country and completely ignore it.

But in answer Yes i would until either an agreement is reached or the union calls a referendum on what is (or in this case isn't) on the table.

 

[313103]

They might have voted for the original dispute, but they don't vote for each strike day, and before each strike it is the executive which has to calculate the 'value for money' of the strike day.

As far as i am aware this still is the original dispute, as the unions position has not changed. One cant have a ballot for every day of strike action. In days of yonder one was expected to be out continuously, nowadays it is not practicable.

 

[Robertj21a]

So, the RMT carries on calling strikes every month/week or whatever - and Southern just keeps on ignoring them.

Doesn't sound like a very successful course of action for RMT members !

 

[313103]

So, the RMT carries on calling strikes every month/week or whatever - and Southern just keeps on ignoring them.

Doesn't sound like a very successful course of action for RMT members !

Well one would say that when dft/gtr started their nonsense it was never going to be successful for Rmt members, unless you are anyone on here knows more i would gladly like to know.

 

[JamesTT]

Well one would say that when dft/gtr started their nonsense it was never going to be successful for Rmt members, unless you are anyone on here knows more i would gladly like to know.

Surely it will only not be successful for those transferred to the OBS role IF not when IF, the OBS role is disbanded and those in it are made redundant or displaced into lower paid roles. What do investment firms say past performance is not proof of future performance I believe.

 

[Moonshot]

Surely it will only not be successful for those transferred to the OBS role IF not when IF, the OBS role is disbanded and those in it are made redundant or displaced into lower paid roles. What do investment firms say past performance is not proof of future performance I believe.

What advice would you give to a current guard facing the possibility of his or her role being changed into an OBS position ?

 

[king_walnut]

What advice would you give to a current guard facing the possibility of his or her role being changed into an OBS position ?

The job is much easier, it pays the same if not more, with a better rest day pattern.

 

[313103]

What advice would you give to a current guard facing the possibility of his or her role being changed into an OBS position ?

If i was in that position i would leave the company.

 

[Solent&Wessex]

What advice would you give to a current guard facing the possibility of his or her role being changed into an OBS position ?

I would want my representatives to recognise when they have absolutely no chance of success, and make an agreement to retain the pay, conditions, training etc of existing staff as best as possible and as early as possible in the dispute to avoid loads of days of unnecessary lost pay and almost certainly ending up with an inferior deal to that offered earlier in the dispute.

 

[kw12]

When i have voted in a ballot that involved taking strike action i have understood that it could be over in a matter of days or that it could be indefinitely or that just a threat of strike action could be enough.

Voting is something that should not be done lightly, one should think of the possible consequences should you vote for strike action, if you just vote yes for strike action as just a protest vote but you dont really want to go through with it why vote YES then? One should just void their ballot paper, or vote NO or do what vast swathes of people do in this country and completely ignore it.

But in answer Yes i would until either an agreement is reached or the union calls a referendum on what is (or in this case isn't) on the table.

Is it time that the RMT calls a referendum? Do the majority of members wish to continue striking given what has happened since the original vote, nearly a year ago?

Or should the RMT wait for, say, another 28 strikes before calling a referendum if agreement has still not been reached?

 

[infobleep]

If that goes the wrong way it'll just be two unions throwing away their money. At least the drivers would have made the decision themselves though.

They will be throwing less money away than the government has thrown away in compensation. Not to mention the money GTR throw away in the court actions over the freedom of EU Citizens.

 

[AlterEgo]

They will be throwing less money away than the government has thrown away in compensation. Not to mention the money GTR throw away in the court actions over the freedom of EU Citizens.

Which of those parties is hurt more by throwing away money though?

 

[ar10642]

They will be throwing less money away than the government has thrown away in compensation. Not to mention the money GTR throw away in the court actions over the freedom of EU Citizens.

The government has effectively infinitely deep pockets. They can just keep on doing it for as long as the RMT likes. GTR are protected.

Further strikes obviously won't work for the RMT, they simply can't win this one. ASLEF probably didn't want to accept the deal, but they knew it was the best they could get for their members, and sensibly decided to take it.

 

[quantinghome]

It is looking like RMT have made a strategic mistake. I noticed someone's signature had a quote from the late Bob Crow to the effective that if you never fight you will always lose, whereas if you do fight you may win. However, surely there has to be a question of choosing your battles. Southern was always going to be tricky given the number of existing DOO services sharing the same territory and the government taking the risk of revenue loss during strikes. SWT and Northern would appear to be better places to make a stand given there is no DOO/DCO infrastructure currently in place and AFAIK are more standard franchises wrt revenue.

 

[455driver]

The job is much easier, it pays the same if not more, with a better rest day pattern.

But has no guaranteed future past 2019, unlike the Guards role which did have a future.

 

[455driver]

I would want my representatives to recognise when they have absolutely no chance of success, and make an agreement to retain the pay, conditions, training etc of existing staff as best as possible and as early as possible in the dispute to avoid loads of days of unnecessary lost pay and almost certainly ending up with an inferior deal to that offered earlier in the dispute.

You make it sound so easy, but what happens when you (as the Union Rep) go in, ask the Company for all that and they say no, than what!

 

[455driver]

The government has effectively infinitely deep pockets. They can just keep on doing it for as long as the RMT likes. GTR are protected.

Further strikes obviously won't work for the RMT, they simply can't win this one. ASLEF probably didn't want to accept the deal, but they knew it was the best they could get for their members, and sensibly decided to take it.

The ASLEF deal has not been accepted by the members yet, why do people post as if it is a done deal?

 

[sandyravage]

Aslef membership reject the deal by 55 to 45 %

 

[Robertj21a]

The ASLEF deal has not been accepted by the members yet, why do people post as if it is a done deal?

I thought the ASLEF vote was NO, by 54% to 46% ?

 

[Deepgreen]

I thought the ASLEF vote was NO, by 54% to 46% ?

Where has this information come from? Nothing is showing on the BBC news site.

 

[ComUtoR]

Where has this information come from? Nothing is showing on the BBC news site.

https://www.theguardian.com/busines...e-strikes-as-drivers-reject-aslef-backed-deal

Drivers for Southern have rejected a deal negotiated between the Aslef union and their employer, reigniting a long-running dispute that has frequently stranded hundreds of thousands of commuters.

The drivers voted by 54%-46% against a deal that offered limited assurances on rostering a second, safety trained crew member in return for accepting Southern’s government-led plans for more driver-only operation.

http://www.cityam.com/259199/members-train-drivers-union-aslef-reject-southern-rail-deal

Members of train drivers' union Aslef have rejected the deal their union and Southern Rail had agreed.

Earlier this month, a TUC-brokered deal was agreed in the long-running dispute between Southern rail and Aslef, in the wake of fresh talks. It was expected to bring the row over the so-called driver-only operated trains to a close, subject to the referendum of Aslef members.

But members have rejected the proposed deal with 54.1 per cent voting no.

.

And its spreading.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-england-sussex-38986334

Here's a breakdown of how Aslef members voted over the Southern strike deal.

In favour of deal: 317: [45.9%]

Against deal: 374 [54.1%]

Turnout: 72.7%

Result also posted on the ASLEF website..

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Breaking BBC news:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-38994965

Aslef members reject deal with operators of Southern rail that would have ended long-running UK industrial dispute

 

[WatcherZero]

Yes 317 (45.9%)
No 374 (54.1%)
turnout 72.7% (693/953)
Invalid 2

 

[lejog]

Deleted. Duplicated ComUtoR's post

 

[AlterEgo]

BBC reporting on live news TV ticker that ASLEF driver members have rejected the deal.