Southern DOO: ASLEF members vote 79.1% for revised deal

[LateThanNever]

Perhaps if we are post industrial we need to review where we are and what we are doing and whether it is actually possible to keep growing year on year etc, whether it is possible to continue making savings.

A company may have a target to improve by 10% year on year but it is actually impossible because in theory to do that they have to take over the world but of course once done that they can't grow any more.

We only need to look at companies in the FTSE 100, invariably they get to a size and then suddenly something goes wrong and they crash back down again. Their chief executives etc might lose their jobs but often get paid off and certainly never seem to refund bonuses earnt before getting there.

I have no objection to entrepreneurs being rewarded for their efforts as invariably they have put themselves at great financial risk to get there but what about the chief execs of other companies?

Is it a good idea to have board members in their 30's and 40s? Do they have the necessary experience in life? In the meantime the foot soldiers at the bottom are looking at not retiring until their 70s due to the inability of the country to support pensions.

In my opinion this country and indeed the western world cannot go on as it is because we will run out of money at some point. The reality is we need employment, and we need to get away from this view that we need to run everything as cheaply as possible. We need to realise there may be benefits to having happy content staff, we may have to accept certain alledged inefficiences.

I think one reason that some travelling members of the public support rail staff in this dispute because they are fed up of cuts in their own workplace and realise that these constant cuts just are not sustainable

Agree with this - except a sovereign currency issuer, such as the UK, can never run out of money as long as it can find people willing to accept £s sterling for goods or services required. There is no sign whatever of that acceptance running out, which is why not being able to 'afford' guards for a better travelling experience is as big a con as austerity itself.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

The driver certainly didn't do that and why should he. His job is to concentrate on driving the train if you ask me.

A similar statement once said about bus drivers having naught to do with fare collection as part of their duties.

 

[Chester1]

I totally disagree. We have potentially thousands of job losses inbound and our economy is extremely fragile. We should be doing all we can to protect every single job in the economy at the moment. For example Mrs May is seemingly gonna have to promise the earth to the car industry just to keep car plants open and Tata employees have had to accept a huge attack on their pensions just to keep a job. Yup that's a fantastic economy you are building their Tories. And the younger generations will pay for it in the future.

The UK employment rate is very low and immigration will be reduced after Brexit so there is a decent amount of buffer to absorb economic shocks. The real problem with our UK employment is casualisation and large numbers of agency workers. This is not relevant to the railways because virtually every railway jobs needs some training and low staff turnover. The government has already persauded Nissan to build a new model in the UK with seemingly no promises that would break EU law pre brexit. Tata Steel UK is basically a £15bn pension fund with an associated company rather than the other way around. 10% employers contribution and 6% employee contributions will provide a good pension and one that will not slowly kill the company.

So who puts the wheelchair on the train on this de-staffed railway?
who answers the passengers questions about connections etc during disruption?
and on and on.

I am not in favour of universal use of DOO for these sorts of reasons. In the case of Merseyrail the new trains will make disability access staffless and its a simple mini metro service meaning connection help is not a big need.

When looking at the wider economy it's very very sad to see that most people can only dream of getting into a decent pension scheme and even if they do get into one there is an increasing risk that that pensions scheme might be attacked in some way shape or form. Look at the amount of workforce in the economy that have had to accept a worsening of their terms and conditions of employment. We live in a country where some people in full time work simply cannot afford to start a family because of housing and child care costs. So yeah I can see very much where the 'race to the bottom' analogy comes from. I'm fortunate to work in an industry that still maintains a very good pensions scheme and most grades still have good conditions. And long may it remain so but I doubt it unless someone drags the Government back into the centre ground kicking and screaming. While we have certain persons in the cabinet I highly doubt it.

Things are far better than soon after the crash. I dont support or vote for the Tories! At any time there will be a significant number of people who think the economy/the country/the world is going down the toilet, its part of human nature. I am in my 20s and have seen my generation struggle, I have also seen plenty of people use national problems as an excuse for their own choices or perpetuate myths that are not true. My favourite is that young people cant buy homes because they need to have permenant jobs. Its absolutely untrue but is widely believed. Several lenders will loan money as long as you have at least 6 months left on your contract. Living costs in the South East and London make day to day life diffficult but any couple in contract jobs should be able to buy in the north. In Manchester and Liverpool you can buy a terrace in a run down but safe area for £70,000-100,000. A couple on even £15,000 each should easily be able to afford that.

Perhaps if we are post industrial we need to review where we are and what we are doing and whether it is actually possible to keep growing year on year etc, whether it is possible to continue making savings.

A company may have a target to improve by 10% year on year but it is actually impossible because in theory to do that they have to take over the world but of course once done that they can't grow any more.

We only need to look at companies in the FTSE 100, invariably they get to a size and then suddenly something goes wrong and they crash back down again. Their chief executives etc might lose their jobs but often get paid off and certainly never seem to refund bonuses earnt before getting there.

I have no objection to entrepreneurs being rewarded for their efforts as invariably they have put themselves at great financial risk to get there but what about the chief execs of other companies?

Is it a good idea to have board members in their 30's and 40s? Do they have the necessary experience in life? In the meantime the foot soldiers at the bottom are looking at not retiring until their 70s due to the inability of the country to support pensions.

In my opinion this country and indeed the western world cannot go on as it is because we will run out of money at some point. The reality is we need employment, and we need to get away from this view that we need to run everything as cheaply as possible. We need to realise there may be benefits to having happy content staff, we may have to accept certain alledged inefficiences.

I think one reason that some travelling members of the public support rail staff in this dispute because they are fed up of cuts in their own workplace and realise that these constant cuts just are not sustainable

Defined contribution pensions are sustainable and the world cannot be paused, fighting technoglogical change causes worse outcomes for people at the bottom than working out to help those disadvantaged. RMT is a prime example of fighting like luddites rather than working out how to best adapt.

 

[40129]

There are plenty of places where bus drivers have nothing to do with fare collection. Try buying a ticket from one in Italy for example. Or London for that matter

 

[JamesTT]

When looking at the wider economy it's very very sad to see that most people can only dream of getting into a decent pension scheme and even if they do get into one there is an increasing risk that that pensions scheme might be attacked in some way shape or form. Look at the amount of workforce in the economy that have had to accept a worsening of their terms and conditions of employment. We live in a country where some people in full time work simply cannot afford to start a family because of housing and child care costs. So yeah I can see very much where the 'race to the bottom' analogy comes from. I'm fortunate to work in an industry that still maintains a very good pensions scheme and most grades still have good conditions. And long may it remain so but I doubt it unless someone drags the Government back into the centre ground kicking and screaming. While we have certain persons in the cabinet I highly doubt it.

I totally agree with what you are saying. Employees should have a decent wage and decent pension. But unfortunately many do not. That does not mean everyone should suffer. But those who benefit from a decent wage should appreciate what they get imo

 

[HH]

I fail to believe that any professional delivering a report hasn't known what the client wants that report to say, and therefore tried to deliver a report that states what the client wants. It may be that in the end they realise they cant but in many cases they will be able to highlight the bits the client wants whilst glossing over the bits the client doesn't want.

The concept of independence, which precludes such behaviour, is highly prized by most firms of consultants, who take a pride in giving an unbiased view. Of course they will try to present it in as palatable way as possible, but they will not change the conclusions. I was rather surprised when I realised this, but it is true. I'm sure there's the occasional 'bad apple', but they are rare.

 

[HH]

Ooh, give that man a job at the DfT.

The point being made was, in fact, that the given argument that DOO reduces dwell times - something which has been well used by those trying to justify destaffing the railways - is not accepted as truth by those who actually operate the railways. That's significant (but of course deeply irksome when you have an propaganda campaign to maintain...)

Have these people actually taken out a stopwatch and timed dispatch in normal operation? Because if they haven't, then as evidence it's worthless. My own observation, as an external observer watching normal operation, are that the more people involved in dispatch the longer it takes, on average. This is mainly because of human factors, such as distraction, miscommunication, etc.

That's not to say that single person dispatch is always quicker, however. At some locations additional staff are necessary - and whistles work!

 

[Goldfish62]

I totally disagree. We have potentially thousands of job losses inbound and our economy is extremely fragile. We should be doing all we can to protect every single job in the economy at the moment. For example Mrs May is seemingly gonna have to promise the earth to the car industry just to keep car plants open and Tata employees have had to accept a huge attack on their pensions just to keep a job. Yup that's a fantastic economy you are building their Tories. And the younger generations will pay for it in the future.

I agree with much of what both you and Chester 1are saying. However, it's no good protecting jobs which aren't actually needed. The Soviets tried that and ended up with Mile-long factories building tractors that no one wanted and an economy in complete tatters.

 

[Deepgreen]

I agree with much of what both you and Chester 1are saying. However, it's no good protecting jobs which aren't actually needed. The Soviets tried that and ended up with Mile-long factories building tractors that no one wanted and an economy in complete tatters.

I'm not sure surplus tractors and train guards can be equated. People do appear to want guards, but it is possible to operate without them. This would seem to put them in the service industry sector, as a role valued by people but not necessarily vital to the most financially-efficient operation of the railway. However, the wider context of redundant people potentially drawing benefits, as opposed to providing a service, has not been explored much here.

 

[Tetchytyke]

The concept of independence, which precludes such behaviour, is highly prized by most firms of consultants, who take a pride in giving an unbiased view.

Yeah right.

Consultants know exactly what the client wants to deliver. If it is outstandingly stupid they will probably say so, but they also understand that if you tell senior managers they are wrong then your chances of getting a second contract significantly diminish.

They don't care about you as a passenger. You're just paying cattle to them. The number cruncher's have done their sums, and come up with the idea that four deaths a year are acceptable on the railways as a price worth paying for DOO.

I don't think it is quite as malicious as that, but there is a cost/benefit analysis undertaken on everything.

Thameslink had a massive fault on a DOO train which resulted in 1000 people being trapped, in dangerous conditions, for abour four hours in a tunnel at Kentish Town. The driver couldn't control the scene by himself. The company admitted some serious Health and Safety failures, were prosecuted and fined.

The fine was £75,000. Taking into account employer NICs and other on-costs, that's about the cost of two guards. Of course they don't want the guards anymore. A Kentish Town every month would still save them millions, but Kentish Towns don't happen all that often.

I agree with much of what both you and Chester 1are saying. However, it's no good protecting jobs which aren't actually needed. The Soviets tried that and ended up with Mile-long factories building tractors that no one wanted and an economy in complete tatters.

Whether a job is "needed" or not really depends on what barometer you're using to measure worth. The highest paid CEO in the UK, Sir Martin Sorrell, is CEO of a company that started out making wire shopping baskets but is now purely a marketing company, having closed all its manufacturing bases. The sky really wouldn't fall in if we lost an ad agency or ten.

On pounds and pence alone then, no, you can probably get rid of guards. Wheelchair passengers aren't lucrative, and the fines for the odd death or disfigurement here and there aren't going to outweigh the cost of the guards. But I'm not convinced we should be judging simply on the pounds and pence.

 

[Deepgreen]

Yeah right.

Consultants know exactly what the client wants to deliver. If it is outstandingly stupid they will probably say so, but they also understand that if you tell senior managers they are wrong then your chances of getting a second contract significantly diminish.



I don't think it is quite as malicious as that, but there is a cost/benefit analysis undertaken on everything.

Thameslink had a massive fault on a DOO train which resulted in 1000 people being trapped, in dangerous conditions, for abour four hours in a tunnel at Kentish Town. The driver couldn't control the scene by himself. The company admitted some serious Health and Safety failures, were prosecuted and fined.

The fine was £75,000. Taking into account employer NICs and other on-costs, that's about the cost of two guards. Of course they don't want the guards anymore. A Kentish Town every month would still save them millions, but Kentish Towns don't happen all that often.



Whether a job is "needed" or not really depends on what barometer you're using to measure worth. The highest paid CEO in the UK, Sir Martin Sorrell, is CEO of a company that started out making wire shopping baskets but is now purely a marketing company, having closed all its manufacturing bases. The sky really wouldn't fall in if we lost an ad agency or ten.

On pounds and pence alone then, no, you can probably get rid of guards. Wheelchair passengers aren't lucrative, and the fines for the odd death or disfigurement here and there aren't going to outweigh the cost of the guards. But I'm not convinced we should be judging simply on the pounds and pence.

What was the basis of the fine? As Thameslink has no plans to provide guards, or any form of second crew member, on any of its trains, how has the fine affected its on-train operating regime in any meaningful way?

 

[Tetchytyke]

What was the basis of the fine?

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/tran...800-passengers-are-left-stranded-8819715.html

Essentially it was because the driver, all on his own with 800 people trapped in a crush loaded 377, lost control. At one stage he tried to move the train with passengers in the tunnel, as they'd given up and de-trained themselves.

As Thameslink has no plans to provide guards, or any form of second crew member, on any of its trains, how has the fine affected its on-train operating regime in any meaningful way?

At the time First Capital Connect and Southern were different TOCs, and now they are not.

You're trying to argue that, now that GTR know their Thameslink company was fined £75,000 for an appalling breach of health and safety legislation, that doesn't get factored into what they do with their Southern company?

 

[Deepgreen]

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/tran...800-passengers-are-left-stranded-8819715.html

Essentially it was because the driver, all on his own with 800 people trapped in a crush loaded 377, lost control. At one stage he tried to move the train with passengers in the tunnel, as they'd given up and de-trained themselves.



At the time First Capital Connect and Southern were different TOCs, and now they are not.

You're trying to argue that, now that GTR know their Thameslink company was fined £75,000 for an appalling breach of health and safety legislation, that doesn't get factored into what they do with their Southern company?

I'm not trying to argue anything, just wondering what, if any, changes were made. I would, however, hope that the findings from the incident would be enforced by whichever TOC happens to run the service from that time on, even if/when changing hands. In this case, I would have hoped that Thameslink would have been forced to implement whatever requirements were placed on them at the time, whether Southern are affected or not (which, if the requirements were location-specific and as they don't operate through Kentish Town, they wouldn't be).

Perhaps the fine was simply imposed and no other changes were mandated?

 

[Tetchytyke]

I'm not trying to argue anything, just wondering what, if any, changes were made.

You'd have to read the RAIB report about that, but I believe there were several changes to do with the operation of Electrostars through the core, including changing where the current changeover happens and ensuring that compatible trains operated in front or behind each other. There were changes at FCC control as well.

https://assets.publishing.service.g...0b6024100016d/R072012_120523_Kentish_Town.pdf

The underlying issue was that all communication on the failed train also failed, and the driver couldn't control the situation alone. That isn't location specific: indeed, if the train was above ground it'd be more likely for heat-exhausted passengers to detrain after being stuck for so long.

 

[HH]

Yeah right.

Consultants know exactly what the client wants to deliver. If it is outstandingly stupid they will probably say so, but they also understand that if you tell senior managers they are wrong then your chances of getting a second contract significantly diminish.

You don't want that sort of client. Of course I'm sure that there are desperate people who will do that, but the major consultants guard their independence jealously, because otherwise no-one would believe a word they wrote. Providing dodgy reports is not good business in the long term.

The people they do business with know that and I doubt they really care about the opinions of a troll in a forum.

 

[Deepgreen]

You'd have to read the RAIB report about that, but I believe there were several changes to do with the operation of Electrostars through the core, including changing where the current changeover happens and ensuring that compatible trains operated in front or behind each other. There were changes at FCC control as well.

Thanks. I imagine the compatible trains element must have temporarily ceased now anyway, with the mixture of stock in use (I've certainly seen the three different types follow each other through countless times). Once the route is totally 700-operated, that issue will disappear in any case.

 

[Tetchytyke]

the major consultants guard their independence jealously, because otherwise no-one would believe a word they wrote.

Oh, I'd never accuse a consultant of deliberately lying.

But, as with so much in life, the client's choice of consultant is influenced by the outcome they desire. Large consultancy firms have specialisms and they are chosen for their specialisms. If you want to downsize, you select a change management consultant who specialises in downsizing.

The closeness of the relationship between Tesco and PwC, for instance, was particularly interesting in light of Tesco overstating its profits by £250m.

 

[455driver]

The concept of independence, which precludes such behaviour, is highly prized by most firms of consultants, who take a pride in giving an unbiased view.

Really!
So why was the McNulty report held back and re-written when we had a change of Government?

 

[HH]

The closeness of the relationship between Tesco and PwC, for instance, was particularly interesting in light of Tesco overstating its profits by £250m.

I see two possibilities there:

1. An individual had too much personally at stake and allowed Tesco management too much leeway;
2. They just weren't good enough to find it.

I was talking about the transport consultancies. The trouble with the big four is that they are so big. Poisonous local cultures can develop, as AA showed, when it was the big five.

But in the case of Tesco I rather suspect it was the latter of my two possibilities. It's very hard for outside people, with very limited time, to discover well-hidden irregularities perpetrated by a group of permanent employees. Hell, from what I've seen over the years, it's difficult for these guys to spot outright fraud by one person.

 

[Deepgreen]

I see two possibilities there:

1. An individual had too much personally at stake and allowed Tesco management too much leeway;
2. They just weren't good enough to find it.

I was talking about the transport consultancies. The trouble with the big four is that they are so big. Poisonous local cultures can develop, as AA showed, when it was the big five.

But in the case of Tesco I rather suspect it was the latter of my two possibilities. It's very hard for outside people, with very limited time, to discover well-hidden irregularities perpetrated by a group of permanent employees. Hell, from what I've seen over the years, it's difficult for these guys to spot outright fraud by one person.

Including, of course, the possibility (nothing more) of corruption.

 

[Tetchytyke]

It's very hard for outside people, with very limited time, to discover well-hidden irregularities perpetrated by a group of permanent employees.

Some of the permanent employees were previously permanent employees at PwC though, and so would (theoretically) know how PwC work and how to game PwC systems.

It's an interesting exercise in both conscious and subconscious bias. Quite simply, one chooses the right tool for the job. If the client controls who they employ as a consultant then, by the very nature of that relationship, the consultant cannot be truly independent. You wouldn't employ Wolmar, for instance, to consult on privatising the railways.

ETA: Lets face it, regulatory capture is not an uncommon occurrence.

 

[Chester1]

I'm not sure surplus tractors and train guards can be equated. People do appear to want guards, but it is possible to operate without them. This would seem to put them in the service industry sector, as a role valued by people but not necessarily vital to the most financially-efficient operation of the railway. However, the wider context of redundant people potentially drawing benefits, as opposed to providing a service, has not been explored much here.

Making people redundant does not necessarily increase unemployment. Lower staffing costs reduce prices which gives people more money to spend and to save, which creates jobs elsewere in the economy. Obviously, natural wastage is much better for staff than redundancies! GTR and Merseytravel have ruled out compulsory redundancies though.

Could GTR copy Merseytravels solution to disabled access or would the neccessary platform works and rolling stock adaptations be too expensive? Standardised platform heights and sensors would remove the disability issue against DOO.

 

[HH]

Some of the permanent employees were previously permanent employees at PwC though, and so would (theoretically) know how PwC work and how to game PwC systems.

It's an interesting exercise in both conscious and subconscious bias. Quite simply, one chooses the right tool for the job. If the client controls who they employ as a consultant then, by the very nature of that relationship, the consultant cannot be truly independent.

I do agree with this. At the very least Auditors should be appointed by a non-Exec committee, which should include a lawyer or accountant not related to the current incumbent.

 

[Matt Taylor]

ITV reporting 'secret' talks taking place tomorrow, Wednesday's strike has not been called off. No TUC, no ACAS, no RMT, just Nick Brown plus two others from GTR and Mick Whelan.

I have a feeling Nick Brown will be bringing a cheque book.


http://www.itv.com/news/meridian/2017-02-20/southern-rail-and-aslef-to-meet-for-secret-peace-talks/

 

[tony6499]

ITV reporting 'secret' talks taking place tomorrow, Wednesday's strike has not been called off. No TUC, no ACAS, no RMT, just Nick Brown plus two others from GTR and Mick Whelan.

I have a feeling Nick Brown will be bringing a cheque book.


http://www.itv.com/news/meridian/2017-02-20/southern-rail-and-aslef-to-meet-for-secret-peace-talks/

Secret talks ?

 

[SA_900]

The message you have entered is too short. Please lengthen your message to at least 5 characters.

 

[HLE]

Making people redundant does not necessarily increase unemployment. Lower staffing costs reduce prices which gives people more money to spend and to save, which creates jobs elsewere in the economy. Obviously, natural wastage is much better for staff than redundancies! GTR and Merseytravel have ruled out compulsory redundancies though.

Could GTR copy Merseytravels solution to disabled access or would the neccessary platform works and rolling stock adaptations be too expensive? Standardised platform heights and sensors would remove the disability issue against DOO.

Getting rid of guards will not lower ticket prices

 

[313103]

GTR and Merseytravel have ruled out compulsory redundancies though.

Currently GTR have only ruled compulsory redundancies because some of those Guards who did not want to be obs left the industry as some would say 'of their volition', some have retired and the rest moved into the made up new role.

As for Mersytravel we dont yet know, because we dont have numbers on how many will leave, how many will retire and how many will move over to the new made up role. All we do know (that ive read on here anyway) is that they only require 60 people in this new role. If no one takes up leaving 'of their own volition' or takes up early retirement i can absolutely guarantee that compulsory redundancies will take place.

 

[313103]

Getting rid of guards will not lower ticket prices

Hear, hear and i will add that any money saved by getting rid of guards does not go back into the railway, the money saved will go to the shareholders own pockets.

Has any one who travels on London Overground seen their fares go down as a result of DOO since 2013? Apart from 5 car operation (which was purchased before the guards went) has the service changed significantly and better? As far as i am aware apart from some tweaking it is still more or less the same as when i left in 2013.

 

[455driver]

Currently GTR have only ruled compulsory redundancies because some of those Guards who did not want to be obs left the industry as some would say 'of their volition', some have retired and the rest moved into the made up new role.

As for Merseytravel we dont yet know, because we dont have numbers on how many will leave, how many will retire and how many will move over to the new made up role. All we do know (that ive read on here anyway) is that they only require 60 people in this new role. If no one takes up leaving 'of their own volition' or takes up early retirement i can absolutely guarantee that compulsory redundancies will take place.

Or they make their position so untenable they eventually leave of their own volition, ie bored senseless and completely demoralised, but hey at least they werent made redundant!