Southern DOO: ASLEF members vote 79.1% for revised deal

[ainsworth74]

If you were working for ASLEF, which high profile battle would you choose to flight?

Got to be Northern. That's the one where ASLEF may be able to mount a very serious challenge as it's going to be a huge change in the way that drivers on Northern currently work (there is no DOO(P) on Northern currently at all).

 

[OliverS]

I don't even see how there is an argument FOR DOO for passengers, the people paying the wages won't see their ticket prices fall, and with more and more guards and drivers doing 'full crew working', in times of disruption having a train run DOO won't make any difference as the drivers will still be subject to the same rest rules as they are now.

Basically, the passengers will receive the same or less service (assuming GTR do hold up their promise of OBS on every train), for the same money, but have a higher risk of an incident and have fewer people capable of reacting in the event of an emergency. What exactly is in it for the people who pay the shareholders dividends?

There are three arguments I have seen:

Firstly that in time of disruption only drivers need to be provided. A second member of staff is desirable but not necessary. That means an easier job to get trains and drivers in place as you have only one person's hours and location to worry about and so hopefully more trains can run.

Secondly I have seen arguments that guard dispatch is slower than DOO or platform dispatch and so dwell times reduce and so theoretically more trains can be run.

Finally by not doing dispatch the second member of staff is more available to passengers and so better information can be provided and theoretically more revenue can be collected. More revenue means that bids for the franchise will be higher and so it saves money for taxpayers, i.e. you and me.

I think Southern have only used the first and last arguments, I can't remember where I saw the middle argument.

 

[pompeyfan]

There are three arguments I have seen:

Firstly that in time of disruption only drivers need to be provided. A second member of staff is desirable but not necessary. That means an easier job to get trains and drivers in place as you have only one person's hours and location to worry about and so hopefully more trains can run.

Secondly I have seen arguments that guard dispatch is slower than DOO or platform dispatch and so dwell times reduce and so theoretically more trains can be run.

Finally by not doing dispatch the second member of staff is more available to passengers and so better information can be provided and theoretically more revenue can be collected. More revenue means that bids for the franchise will be higher and so it saves money for taxpayers, i.e. you and me.

I think Southern have only used the first and last arguments, I can't remember where I saw the middle argument.

Okay, first argument, I believe the better answer is full crew working, matching up guards and drivers to the same trains where possible in which TOCs are increasingly doing.

2nd argument - from experience a guard with a whistle encourages the ones the dawdle, the driver has no way of 'hustling' people.

3rd argument - take the southern Victoria to South coast via Arun Vally services, even the stoppers have a good amount of run time between stations, the extra 3 minutes customer facing time probably won't make much, if any, difference. The only time I've seen an issue is with a guard leaving it a little bit late to sell a ticket when they're on approach to a station and it turns out the be a card payment or some other complication. The guard has to run off to do the doors, but if management saw that they'd not be impressed.

I realise these aren't your arguments, so please don't take it that I'm attacking you as that's not my intention.

 

[Dave1987]

There are three arguments I have seen:

Firstly that in time of disruption only drivers need to be provided. A second member of staff is desirable but not necessary. That means an easier job to get trains and drivers in place as you have only one person's hours and location to worry about and so hopefully more trains can run.

Secondly I have seen arguments that guard dispatch is slower than DOO or platform dispatch and so dwell times reduce and so theoretically more trains can be run.

Finally by not doing dispatch the second member of staff is more available to passengers and so better information can be provided and theoretically more revenue can be collected. More revenue means that bids for the franchise will be higher and so it saves money for taxpayers, i.e. you and me.

I think Southern have only used the first and last arguments, I can't remember where I saw the middle argument.

The RMT's position was that there would always be a second member of staff so accurate, up to date information could be given to passengers. During disruption information provision is always said to be the worst thing for passengers. As a driver you can't give your passengers up date info unless you have a very on the ball signaller who constantly updates their GSMR general broadcasts but they have way too bigger workload to do that. A guard can use their mobile or tablet to see the internal messaging services to get bang up to date info to passengers.

 

[HLE]

Time we had pilot only planes on every route:

- Computer can fly the plane now

- Pilot is in touch with the ground all the time via radio

- Pilot can open and close the doors and there's on tarmac dispatch at every airport

- He's got a PA so he can communicate with the passengers

- No one can get on without a ticket

- If there's a disaster chances are extra staff won't be able to do anything anyway

- And ALL airports sell coffee and food so we don't even need them for that

Furthermore, it's an easy job, they just sit there and the computer does everything, so time we reduced the training time, the pay and make them work longer hours with less time between shifts.

Well said that man.

 

[Harbornite]

Time we had pilot only planes on every route:

- Computer can fly the plane now

- Pilot is in touch with the ground all the time via radio

- Pilot can open and close the doors and there's on tarmac dispatch at every airport

- He's got a PA so he can communicate with the passengers

- No one can get on without a ticket

- If there's a disaster chances are extra staff won't be able to do anything anyway

- And ALL airports sell coffee and food so we don't even need them for that

Furthermore, it's an easy job, they just sit there and the computer does everything, so time we reduced the training time, the pay and make them work longer hours with less time between shifts.

I get that this is in jest but there are some issues with your post. First, how can the government influence private airlines in this way?

Secondly, read this...

Questions & Answers
Essays & Stories
"I wish I could fold up Patrick Smith and put him in my suitcase."
- Stephen Dubner,
Coauthor of Freakonomics

THE BOOK IS HERE!


15 Things No Airport Should Be Without
Terminal Madness: What Is Airport Security?
Air Travel Glossary: How To Speak Airline
Author's Featured Photo

MexicoCityTowers
Blog Archives
Follow Us!
RSSFACEBOOK
Subscribe to our mailing list

email address
Subscribe


PILOTS AND COPILOTS. WHO ARE THESE PEOPLE?

Epaulets



February 18, 2014

DEAR ASSOCIATED PRESS (and most other media outlets):

I wish you would pay closer attention to use of the phrase “the pilot” in your stories. This is one of those commonly repeated tics that always gets my goat, resulting in pedantic, vaguely neurotic rants like this one.

“The pilot” did this, “the pilot” said that. Well, which pilot exactly, because there are always at least two pilots in a jetliner cockpit — a captain and first officer — and both of these individuals are fully qualified to operate the aircraft.

Use of the singular implies that the other person in the cockpit is something other than, and presumably less than, an actual pilot. I’m not sure if reporters have a style guide for these things, but this is nothing a simple “s” can’t fix: “the pilots.” Alternately you could say “the cockpit crew.” If a differentiation in rank is needed, I’d recommend using “captain” and “first officer.” Just be aware that either pilot may be at the controls during a particular incident.

The first officer is known colloquially as the copilot. But a copilot is not an apprentice. He or she shares flying duties with the captain more or less equally. The captain is officially in charge, and earns a larger paycheck to accompany that responsibility, but both individuals fly the aircraft. Copilots perform just as many takeoffs and landings as captains do, and both are part of the decision-making process.

In fact, while protocols might be slightly different carrier to carrier, it’s not unusual during emergencies or other abnormal situations for the captain to delegate hands-on flying duties to the copilot, so that the captain can concentrate on communications, troubleshooting, coordinating the checklists, etc.

Do I seem sensitive about this? That’s because I’m a copilot.

A copilot becomes a captain not by virtue of skill or experience, but rather when his or her seniority standing allows it. And not every copilot wants to become a captain right away. Airline seniority bidding is a complicated thing, and a pilot can often have a more comfortable quality of life — salary, aircraft assignment, schedule and choice of destinations — as a senior copilot than as a junior captain. Thus, at a given airline, there are plenty of copilots who are older and more experienced than many captains.

In some parts of the world, including parts of Asia, the experience disparity between captains and copilots tends to be more pronounced. The typical major airline new-hire in the United States tends to be a lot more experienced than the typical new-hire in Europe or Asia. But not always, and the raw totals in a pilot’s logbook are only part of the story and not necessarily representative of skill or talent. Airline training is never easy, and any pilot, no matter how young or comparatively inexperienced, needs to be good to succeed at that level. And once you’re there, cockpit duties are always shared equally and even the least experienced copilot is by any measure a pilot, trained and certified to fly the airplane.

It can vary country to country, but captains usually wear four stripes on their sleeves and epaulets; copilots wear three.

On older planes there was a third cockpit station occupied by the second officer, also known as the flight engineer. (I spent four years as a flight engineer on a cargo jet in the mid-1990s.) Once upon a time planes also carried navigators, but the last known navigator in these parts was the old Howard Borden character from the original “Bob Newhart Show.”

Long-haul flights carry augmented crews that work in shifts. There might be two copilots and a captain; two captains and a copilot; or maybe two captains and two copilots. It varies airline to airline and with the length of flight. For example, at my airline, a ten-hour flight will carry three pilots: two copilots and a captain. Each crew member will have roughly one-third of the flight free. He or she retires to a bunk room or designated crew rest seat, while the other two remain up front.

http://www.askthepilot.com/pilots-and-copilots/

 

[OliverS]

Okay, first argument, I believe the better answer is full crew working, matching up guards and drivers to the same trains where possible in which TOCs are increasingly doing.

2nd argument - from experience a guard with a whistle encourages the ones the dawdle, the driver has no way of 'hustling' people.

3rd argument - take the southern Victoria to South coast via Arun Vally services, even the stoppers have a good amount of run time between stations, the extra 3 minutes customer facing time probably won't make much, if any, difference. The only time I've seen an issue is with a guard leaving it a little bit late to sell a ticket when they're on approach to a station and it turns out the be a card payment or some other complication. The guard has to run off to do the doors, but if management saw that they'd not be impressed.

I realise these aren't your arguments, so please don't take it that I'm attacking you as that's not my intention.

I'm playing devil's advocate here so I don't necessarily believe these arguments so feel free to attack them...

I agree that crew working sounds like a better situation but DOO does give more flexibility. I.e. the non-driving member of staff can be redeployed to do something that might make the service recover better (not that I can think of anything apart from possibly helping with an emergency situation). In essence the more flexibility you can give control to deploy staff the more tools they have to get things working again.

2nd argument was comparing with platform dispatch. I agree that with no additional staff DOO won't necessarily show speed improvements. I think the comparison was somewhere like East Croydon where with DOO Thameslink there was less delay than Southern as the additional cycle of the local door was unnecessary.

Consider that door duties require guards to be in certain parts of the train. Without those duties the guard can position themselves anywhere that they consider there might be problems. For instance to keep an eye on some potentially troublesome passengers.

 

[Antman]

I don't even see how there is an argument FOR DOO for passengers, the people paying the wages won't see their ticket prices fall, and with more and more guards and drivers doing 'full crew working', in times of disruption having a train run DOO won't make any difference as the drivers will still be subject to the same rest rules as they are now.

Basically, the passengers will receive the same or less service (assuming GTR do hold up their promise of OBS on every train), for the same money, but have a higher risk of an incident and have fewer people capable of reacting in the event of an emergency. What exactly is in it for the people who pay the shareholders dividends?

I don't think most passengers give two hoots either way, would most people even know whether there was a guard on their train? When there is one they are often in the back cab where they need to be to do the doors and have little contact with passengers.

 

[embers25]

The RMT's position was that there would always be a second member of staff so accurate, up to date information could be given to passengers. During disruption information provision is always said to be the worst thing for passengers. As a driver you can't give your passengers up date info unless you have a very on the ball signaller who constantly updates their GSMR general broadcasts but they have way too bigger workload to do that. A guard can use their mobile or tablet to see the internal messaging services to get bang up to date info to passengers.

And 75% of the time IME I have to tell the guard that there is disruption as they have no clue or haven't read their phone/pager. Also numerous times I have been delayed by 1-2 minutes at several stations in a row by guards not being able to open doors due to issuing tickets on stopping trains and departures have been delayed as passengers on the platform stop guards as they are closing doors to ask questions about other trains which the guard usually has no clue about. Once delay repay is done by minute those minutes will add up and they already cause knock on delays and missed connections. 2nd person on the train I have no issue and support where possible but not if it means my train gets delayed or if they operate the doors. Also this whole Corbynesque/Union Dream Job For Life attitude is ludicrous. If everyone had jobs for life there would be no incentive for performance and no promotion and more unemployment as companies went broke as they couldn't afford to sustain unproductive staff.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I don't think most passengers give two hoots either way, would most people even know whether there was a guard on their train? When there is one they are often in the back cab where they need to be to do the doors and have little contact with passengers.

And in any other job those guards that don't interact with passengers would be disciplined but not on the railway. Guards giving incorrect advice and gateline staff such as at Paddington who don't know basic ticket restrictions would be retrained and if they didn't improve fired, but not on the railway. It's a joke.

 

[pompeyfan]

Okay I concede to the point that in certain stations dispatch has to be done from a particular door due to signal sightings or off indicators or other infrastructure reasons and this may lead to the patrolling of the train being impacted (in fact I can think of an example where the guard can't get to the rear of a 12 car because the first hour is all 6/7/8 car platforms), but I don't think that is a compelling enough example to downgrade the role and increase the long term risk.

 

[FlashingYellows]

What I find amazing is train drivers and the union ASLEF are making a big thing about something we find very important to safety. Yet people are just regarding it as backward and not the future etc. Wonder how many people are on the BALPA website telling pilots their concerns over flying hours are nonsense? I find it utterly bonkers that the people who do the actual job day in day out are completely ignored and not those who have never driven a train in their lives believe they know better than those of us that actually do the job.

Why don't people ask themselves what a driver stands to gain from a long drawn out battle if it's not about safety.

It isn't their role that is under threat, it won't be their pay that is reduced nor their responsibilites diminished making them more disposable.

So why are drivers who do the job day in and day out against DOO if not for safety concerns?

 

[physics34]

Why don't people ask themselves what a driver stands to gain from a long drawn out battle if it's not about safety.

It isn't their role that is under threat, it won't be their pay that is reduced nor their responsibilites diminished making them more disposable.

So why are drivers who do the job day in and day out against DOO if not for safety concerns?

spot on.

We have regular discussions amongst ourselves about this. Many would choose a guard on every train rather than a payrise.

Checking all doors are safe and closing them is a big increase in workload and career risk for a driver......... and in times of disruption and emergency situations we would all prfer to have a guard on board.

 

[Dave1987]

And 75% of the time IME I have to tell the guard that there is disruption as they have no clue or haven't read their phone/pager. Also numerous times I have been delayed by 1-2 minutes at several stations in a row by guards not being able to open doors due to issuing tickets on stopping trains and departures have been delayed as passengers on the platform stop guards as they are closing doors to ask questions about other trains which the guard usually has no clue about. Once delay repay is done by minute those minutes will add up and they already cause knock on delays and missed connections. 2nd person on the train I have no issue and support where possible but not if it means my train gets delayed or if they operate the doors. Also this whole Corbynesque/Union Dream Job For Life attitude is ludicrous. If everyone had jobs for life there would be no incentive for performance and no promotion and more unemployment as companies went broke as they couldn't afford to sustain unproductive staff.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


And in any other job those guards that don't interact with passengers would be disciplined but not on the railway. Guards giving incorrect advice and gateline staff such as at Paddington who don't know basic ticket restrictions would be retrained and if they didn't improve fired, but not on the railway. It's a joke.

Yes having the prospect of a job for life is a totally ludicrous idea, and being in a position where you don't know if you will have a job in 6 months time is far far better...... NOT!! Mortgage companies want proof of a stable income before they will lend for you to buy a house, so are you saying that no one apart from the super rich is entitled to own their own home? What an utterly ridiculous post. When I'm working a train that has a guard they have far far more info than I do off of General broadcasts. And before you start quoting about twitter, I've had many passengers tell me they should not have to be on twitter to get service update info.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Why don't people ask themselves what a driver stands to gain from a long drawn out battle if it's not about safety.

It isn't their role that is under threat, it won't be their pay that is reduced nor their responsibilites diminished making them more disposable.

So why are drivers who do the job day in and day out against DOO if not for safety concerns?

Fantastic post.

 

[Don King]

Also this whole Corbynesque/Union Dream Job For Life attitude is ludicrous. If everyone had jobs for life there would be no incentive for performance and no promotion and more unemployment as companies went broke as they couldn't afford to sustain unproductive staff.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


And in any other job those guards that don't interact with passengers would be disciplined but not on the railway. Guards giving incorrect advice and gateline staff such as at Paddington who don't know basic ticket restrictions would be retrained and if they didn't improve fired, but not on the railway. It's a joke.

Perhaps this whole job for life and punishment for incompetence should start at the top in the corporate and political field. Dyan Crowther manages to screw up Southern, gets another well renumerated boardroom position. Gerald Corbett screwed up Railtrack with death on his watch, nice payout and more lucrative executive roles. Fred the Shred, G4S, A4e, Capita and so on - a huge track record of failure and in many cases police investigations and yet more rewards of payouts or contracts. Nick Clegg turns his once respected alternative party into something as respected as Scientology and yet gets treated like some sort of sage, and nice speaking engagements with Goldman Sachs and so on.

When these people face struggling with the rent due to incompetence or gross misconduct in their roles, then I may have more sympathy for sacking all these useless rail staff you claim exist. And incidentally I have seen useless and dangerous staff sacked over the years, and there has been no strike or whatnot because the union agrees with the management over their actions.

 

[Antman]

Yes having the prospect of a job for life is a totally ludicrous idea, and being in a position where you don't know if you will have a job in 6 months time is far far better...... NOT!! Mortgage companies want proof of a stable income before they will lend for you to buy a house, so are you saying that no one apart from the super rich is entitled to own their own home? What an utterly ridiculous post. When I'm working a train that has a guard they have far far more info than I do off of General broadcasts. And before you start quoting about twitter, I've had many passengers tell me they should not have to be on twitter to get service update info.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Fantastic post.

Are there any other industries where somebody would expect a job for life?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Why don't people ask themselves what a driver stands to gain from a long drawn out battle if it's not about safety.

It isn't their role that is under threat, it won't be their pay that is reduced nor their responsibilites diminished making them more disposable.

So why are drivers who do the job day in and day out against DOO if not for safety concerns?

Yet many other drivers drive DOO trains everyday without any problem.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Perhaps this whole job for life and punishment for incompetence should start at the top in the corporate and political field.

Why am I not surprised at reading such utter tosh, where the blame game always ignores those in the lower ranks of those at the hard end of the debate.

Shall we all join in with a workers rendition of that famous ode to being blame-free at all costs that was penned by the Strawbs in 1973.....
"You don't get me, I'm part of the union"...:roll:

 

[Don King]

Are there any other industries where somebody would expect a job for life?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Yet many other drivers drive DOO trains everyday without any problem.

They have many issues and large numbers of DOO drivers leave to go to freight or regional / intercity passenger jobs to get away from it. Many DOO depots are starter depots where drivers go to get their job, with large staff turnover.

 

[KTHV]

What I find amazing is train drivers and the union ASLEF are making a big thing about something we find very important to safety. Yet people are just regarding it as backward and not the future etc. Wonder how many people are on the BALPA website telling pilots their concerns over flying hours are nonsense? I find it utterly bonkers that the people who do the actual job day in day out are completely ignored and not those who have never driven a train in their lives believe they know better than those of us that actually do the job.

 

[AlterEgo]

Well said that man.

There should be a fine for people who compare aircraft to trains on this forum. £10 a pop, fixed penalty.

 

[Don King]

Why am I not surprised at reading such utter tosh, where the blame game always ignores those in the lower ranks of those at the hard end of the debate.

Shall we all join in with a workers rendition of that famous ode to being blame-free at all costs that was penned by the Strawbs in 1973.....
"You don't get me, I'm part of the union"...:roll:

Because corporate bosses, bankers and politicians are always blameless obviously...

And had you bothered to read such "tosh" properly you will note that I have said that rail staff are often dismissed for incompetence and dangerous behaviour and that the unions and staff will quite happily support the managers in doing so in most of these cases. I know two people recently sacked for going AWOL and failing an alcohol test. Good riddance was the attitude of the union and their colleagues.

 

[gtr driver]

I don't think most passengers give two hoots either way, would most people even know whether there was a guard on their train? When there is one they are often in the back cab where they need to be to do the doors and have little contact with passengers.

They might when:

- one of them or theirs gets killed or hideously maimed in a platform train interface incident that a guard doing dispatch would have prevented.

- Their train gets increasingly delayed or skips stops to make up time when the driver has to keep shutting down the cab to go back and check each coach individually because he doesn't feel happy dispatching the train by himself with the rubbish view he's got

- Their train is taken out of service and all the trains it was due to work being cancelled because the DOO cab monitors or PA system have packed up

- Their train is delayed, turned early etc because the driver now has to sort out assistance for a passenger, reset a Passcomm, investigate a smoke alarm, a disturbance, get help for a sick passenger etc

But what do I know? I'm only a driver.

 

[pompeyfan]

I don't think most passengers give two hoots either way, would most people even know whether there was a guard on their train? When there is one they are often in the back cab where they need to be to do the doors and have little contact with passengers.

I think a lot of passengers do care, they like seeing someone in a uniform, I also find it hard to believe that guards 'are often in the back cab' maybe metro stuff they are, but regional I'd beg to differ, certainly on most journeys I make I see a guard, they may not be doing revenue but they're out and about.

Also I'm sure wheelchair users and others that require assistance like the fact there's a 2nd member of staff on board.

That said you haven't answered my original question... how does a standard fare paying passenger gain by the ability of their TOC to run a train DOO, how does their journey improve? The only benefit of downgrading the guards role will be to the shareholders etc.

 

[al78]

Why don't people ask themselves what a driver stands to gain from a long drawn out battle if it's not about safety.

Because it is much easier to be spoonfed BS from the media or whatever spouts closest to ones precious world view, than it is to stop, think, do a bit of research, then come to an informed opinion. The latter takes a bit of time and effort, and that would never do.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Because corporate bosses, bankers and politicians are always blameless obviously...

I thought that Commisar Corbyn and the Momentum "reds under the bed" commissariat were now to be regarded as being politicians who could not be mentioned as being those "blameless" politicians to which you refer to above?

Sometimes, out of sheer and utter devilment over the past years, I have posed the question of the RMT running a franchise, with the fact that they know everything about running a franchise and all the matters that go into it, but all that usually occurs is a sudden attack of posting shellshock amongst the devotees of those resident at Unity House.

 

[Don King]

I thought that Commisar Corbyn and the Momentum "reds under the bed" commissariat were now to be regarded as being politicians who could not be mentioned as being those "blameless" politicians to which you refer to above?

Sometimes, out of sheer and utter devilment over the past years, I have posed the question of the RMT running a franchise, with the fact that they know everything about running a franchise and all the matters that go into it, but all that usually occurs is a sudden attack of posting shellshock amongst the devotees of those resident at Unity House.

I've not mentioned Corbyn at all. If Corbyn ends up reducing Labour to half their seats or some sort of similar disaster then he has been just as incompetent as Clegg. Except that unlike Clegg, Corbyn won't be treated like a sage or given lucrative speaking fees from Goldman Sachs and the like, but will be treated as a chump.

ASLEF to my knowledge did want to run a franchise. A coalition of ASLEF, RMT, TSSA and various passenger groups running one wouldn't be a bad idea actually. Preferable to Serco - bring it on.

 

[Mintona]

Hi Paul,

You don't have to be a Jeremy Corbyn fan to believe that 2 guaranteed safety trained people on a train are better than 1. You seem to consistently get these 2 issues muddled up, so I just wanted to clear that up for you.

 

[Don King]

Hi Paul,

You don't have to be a Jeremy Corbyn fan to believe that 2 guaranteed safety trained people on a train are better than 1. You seem to consistently get these 2 issues muddled up, so I just wanted to clear that up for you.

Indeed. There appears to be this bizarre idea that supporting guards on trains is somehow a left wing position - in fact a communist position given some of the rhetoric I hear on here. It is notable that even amongst director level there is support for guards on trains, the 2003 guards strikes didn't take place on GNER and the First Group companies, as they agreed with the unions.

I'll have to let my UKIP supporting colleagues know they are communists for supporting properly staffed trains.

 

[FordFocus]

I thought that Commisar Corbyn and the Momentum "reds under the bed" commissariat were now to be regarded as being politicians who could not be mentioned as being those "blameless" politicians to which you refer to above?

Sometimes, out of sheer and utter devilment over the past years, I have posed the question of the RMT running a franchise, with the fact that they know everything about running a franchise and all the matters that go into it, but all that usually occurs is a sudden attack of posting shellshock amongst the devotees of those resident at Unity House.

What on earth has Corbyn and Momentum got to with GTR removing the guards role?

 

[tony6499]

It's always been interesting reading this thread esp as I am on the front line. There are things I could add, lies fixed, but as many of you know I'm very limited in what I can say on here.

But on an interesting note. I hear DOO test trains heading into SWT went well. I cannot give details, but the words fart and spacesuit comes to mind.

I believe the SWT signalman said 'Kiss me Hardy' or something like that

 

[sarahj]

What on earth has Corbyn and Momentum got to with GTR removing the guards role?

The transport sec at conference and during an interview said we all supported Corbyn and that was what the strike was about.