RailUK Forums
RailUK Forums > UK Railway Forums > UK Railway Discussion


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 18th August 2017, 14:13   #13261
tsr
"...will be diverted..."
Established Member
 
tsr's Avatar
 
Join Date: 15 Nov 2011
Location: Approximately 16 minutes away from where I was scheduled to be
Posts: 5,895
Default

Says the 1st and 4th September on the RMT website now.

That's the Friday and Monday either side of that weekend.

Given performance on Southern hasn't been that significantly impacted by the last couple of RMT strikes, I'm afraid I would say that any estimates of disruption would be purely speculative at best.

This is not to say I agree with the implementation of DOO, as most members will recall.
__________________
Friends come and go, but trains come and stay. Especially if the line is suspended. @BookOfMetro - Twitter
tsr is offline   Reply With Quote
Registered users do not see these banners - join today!
Old 18th August 2017, 14:42   #13262
al78
Member
 
Join Date: 8 Jan 2013
Posts: 527
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by furnessvale View Post
What you mean is stop subsidising HGVs to the tune of 70% of operating costs.

This subsidy is provided by the private motorist who, if asked, I am certain would prefer some of that subsidy to be diverted to railfreight giving the motorist a clearer run on the roads.
There seems to be an assertion in there that a primary cause of road congestion is HGV traffic. I would challenge such an assertion, and speculate that the primary cause of traffic congestion is people choosing jobs and homes a long distance apart, and where the only practical way to make the journey is by road, and by motorists driving dangerously, recklessly or like spatially incompetent prats and crashing into each other, resulting in obstruction of primary routes with corresponding tailbacks.

The private motorist may need to be reminded that HGV drivers are performing an essential service to society and the economy, without which society as we know it would collapse. On the other hand, private motoring incurs significant financial and social costs on society and the economy, so we'd all be better off if people decided to make lifestyle choices which allowed them to minimize the amount of driving they do.

Of course, the motoring right whingers who worship the car will never accept this attack on their precious world view.
al78 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th August 2017, 15:19   #13263
coppercapped
Established Member
 
Join Date: 13 Sep 2015
Location: Reading
Posts: 1,146
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by al78 View Post
There seems to be an assertion in there that a primary cause of road congestion is HGV traffic. I would challenge such an assertion, and speculate that the primary cause of traffic congestion is people choosing jobs and homes a long distance apart, and where the only practical way to make the journey is by road, and by motorists driving dangerously, recklessly or like spatially incompetent prats and crashing into each other, resulting in obstruction of primary routes with corresponding tailbacks.

The private motorist may need to be reminded that HGV drivers are performing an essential service to society and the economy, without which society as we know it would collapse. On the other hand, private motoring incurs significant financial and social costs on society and the economy, so we'd all be better off if people decided to make lifestyle choices which allowed them to minimize the amount of driving they do.

Of course, the motoring right whingers who worship the car will never accept this attack on their precious world view.
Few people make 'lifestyle choices' (whatever that means) so they can drive to work. The population of the UK has increased by 9 million people in the last 30 years, an increase of 16%. As town centres, being the dense areas best served by public transport, are in most cases already full, house building tends to be on the periphery of those towns and cities which offer employment.

By definition, 'lifestyle choices' or not, this means that the journey to work in the town or city centre will be longer. As many companies are sited in industrial estates on the edges, or what were the edges, of towns they cannot be linked economically with all the residential areas which serve them - suburb-to-suburb service by public transport is very difficult to arrange as the flows are, individually, not large.

This is not 'worshipping' the car - and such a phrase is a nonsense - it is a simple matter of geometry. 'We'd all be better off if we walked or cycled' seems to be the mantra. It doesn't work any more - towns and cities have got too big. And walking or cycling in the rain is no fun.

Last edited by coppercapped; 18th August 2017 at 15:20.
coppercapped is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th August 2017, 16:08   #13264
Robertj21a
Established Member
 
Join Date: 22 Sep 2013
Posts: 3,069
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by baz962 View Post
Not to mention the fact that although there are some idiot car drivers about the supposed pro's in hgv's are the worst driver's going
Do you have the statistics to prove that ?
Robertj21a is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th August 2017, 16:12   #13265
gallafent
Member
 
Join Date: 23 Dec 2010
Posts: 29
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by coppercapped View Post
This is not 'worshipping' the car - and such a phrase is a nonsense - it is a simple matter of geometry.
… and service provision! For example, a job which is 28km from my house by great circle is a 38km drive taking 42 minutes. The public transport alternative (bus - train - bus) takes 88 minutes. Pervasive multi-modal MaaS will change problems such as this for the better, but it isn't here yet.

Both my house and the job are in densely populated south-east England, incidentally, which clearly should have the best chance of viable public transport systems given its high population density leading to economies of scale in provision … but there are just limits to what fixed-route fixed-mode infrastructure can provide, and very often the car wins hands-down, not only on timing and convenience, but also on cost (even when only one person is in the car). It's unfortunate, but there it is.
gallafent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th August 2017, 20:06   #13266
XDM
On Moderation
 
Join Date: 9 Apr 2016
Posts: 298
Default

The massive 24% pay rise on offer to all Southern drivers is not only for accepting the new DOO. It slightly extends to nine & a half hours the daily duty time on a very small number of turns. I think affecting only 5 early morning starts at Selhurst. But the total hours worked per week is not increased, so the extra hours on those tiny number of daily duties will be balanced by a similar reduction on the rest of the week's turns. It is not onerous.
XDM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 09:01   #13267
Southern Dvr
Member
 
Southern Dvr's Avatar
 
Join Date: 13 Oct 2010
Posts: 228
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by XDM View Post
The massive 24% pay rise on offer to all Southern drivers is not only for accepting the new DOO. It slightly extends to nine & a half hours the daily duty time on a very small number of turns. I think affecting only 5 early morning starts at Selhurst. But the total hours worked per week is not increased, so the extra hours on those tiny number of daily duties will be balanced by a similar reduction on the rest of the week's turns. It is not onerous.
No. It was supposed to be on 5 turns across the network, not just Selhurst. Furthermore there is no trust in this company, so what starts at 5 will just become 10, then 20, then everything that starts before 5am will be at 9.5 hours. The lack of trust here goes back to when the agreement was first made and we said they would just amend turns to book on at 0501 and 0502 and make those 9.5 hours, and can you guess what they did?

There was an acceptance of full DOO, there was the 5am rule as discussed above and then there was 'a full co-operation of all future new timetables' now this last point being particularly vague. Take from it what you will but the membership is inclined to believe that this means the unions would not be able to scrutinise or suggest amendments to rosters or diagrams.

Put simply, that pay offer of 24% was simply not worth the conditions that came with it, because this company cannot be trusted not to abuse them.
__________________
Opinions expressed are copyright me
Southern Dvr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 10:21   #13268
Robertj21a
Established Member
 
Join Date: 22 Sep 2013
Posts: 3,069
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Southern Dvr View Post
No. It was supposed to be on 5 turns across the network, not just Selhurst. Furthermore there is no trust in this company, so what starts at 5 will just become 10, then 20, then everything that starts before 5am will be at 9.5 hours. The lack of trust here goes back to when the agreement was first made and we said they would just amend turns to book on at 0501 and 0502 and make those 9.5 hours, and can you guess what they did?

There was an acceptance of full DOO, there was the 5am rule as discussed above and then there was 'a full co-operation of all future new timetables' now this last point being particularly vague. Take from it what you will but the membership is inclined to believe that this means the unions would not be able to scrutinise or suggest amendments to rosters or diagrams.

Put simply, that pay offer of 24% was simply not worth the conditions that came with it, because this company cannot be trusted not to abuse them.

As I, and others, have said before, I can see this still being an unresolved issue in another 12 months or so. You never know, it might not get resolved until the next franchise !
Robertj21a is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:13.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8
© RailUK Forums 2005 - 2017