Sums it up nicely. Twitter have clearly been told to place as much blame for things on conductors as they can. Tweeting cancelations because of 'high conductor sickness levels' is disgraceful. 'Unavailable train crew' is all that is needed.
Why is it disgraceful? If a much larger number of staff than normal have phoned in sick then what exactly is wrong with saying that. It's factually correct. The public may choose to take a view as to what is causing that excess sickness. Some will view it as the staff are being bullied, others will regard it as quasi-industrial action. That's up to them.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I would agree that this is a political dispute. GTR would not be headed this way without at the very least the tacit support of the government, but it feels much more likely that the govt is pulling the strings.
From the govt's perspective it doesn't see why DOO operation shouldn't be operated more widely more than 30 years after the original fight to introduce it with the introduction of the Midland Electrics service (when the brand new Class 317s stood idle for around 12 months, along with all the newly installed electrification). Since then it has been introduced in many locations, and appears to operate effectively and safely. (How many deaths, serious injuries are attributable to no second person on board over that 30 year + period? I don't know the answer to this, and would be interested if anyone does.)
From the union's perspective, it is a clear attack on their members working conditions and maybe jobs. Historically the railway unions have been very effective at fighting their members' corner, not least because of the disruption that they can cause in the event of them taking action. With Scotrail and maybe one or other of the Northern operators going down a similar route, they are minded to dig their heels in, as the consequences of a loss on GTR will have a wider effect across the industry.
With one caveat, I believe the govt, sorry GTR, will win this dispute. That's because, if it comes to it, it would be relatively quick to train up new onboard staff, and don't forget, what GTR is proposing means that their trains won't (in the main) need a second person to operate. So any disruption would not be as massively disruptive as would have been in the old days, and many office staff now have the ability to work at home, again reducing the impact on passengers.
The caveat is, of course, ASLEF. They would appear to hold the trump card in the wider dispute. However, as their argument cannot be based on an attack of their members' rights and jobs, there may be less public opinion behind them. A lot of their argument is around the difficulty safely despatching the longest (12 car) trains, and this won't be an issue outside the south east.
It's worth noting that the industry does generally appear better prepared in the event of strike action than in the past. Last year's strikes on GWR saw a reasonable service on many (though not all) lines, improving on each day. I suspect that resulted in the strikes petering out, with the RMT regrouping and biding their time to launch a joint offensive with ASLEF, who, as noted above, are in a much better position to cause widespread disruption.