Southern DOO: ASLEF members vote 79.1% for revised deal

[Xenophon PCDGS]

By banging on about communist dictator lovers, you and other people have sought to make this a left wing issue and portray it as such, as though it is some far left chuntering with no validity in the real world, by a bunch of dictator supporting nutters.

To be fair, the way that the RMT "top brass" seem to want their union to be viewed as a Champion of Socialism, after being responsible for they way that the RMT press releases are worded, is it any wonder why that a view of "a left-wing" issue is seen by many to be the case?

 

[ungreat]

Still you won't accept that a Guard operating a 377 from the train has no more communication with a punter on the platform than a driver.

I sign 387s which i believe are much the same as 377s...I stand to be corrected...unless corrected here goes...
If a guard dispatches from the rear cab(door control panel in there operated by key) of one of these then he/she can open the rear cab window and observe the dispatch AS THE TRAIN LEAVES and also CAN GIVE A STOP SIGNAL TO THE DRIVER WHILST THE TRAIN IS LEAVING.Also,this allows said guard to communicate with people who think trains that are leaving will stop if they run down the side of it pressing door buttons.
More communication
Safer

May I ask if you are a DOO driver or one of our dwindling guards?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

To be fair, the way that the RMT "top brass" seem to want their union to be viewed as a Champion of Socialism, after being responsible for they way that the RMT press releases are worded, is it any wonder why that a view of "a left-wing" issue is seen by many to be the case?

I believe this is a condition called "DailywailSunism"...A common condition amongst people who generally have no working rights,and believe no one else should have any or stand up for the few they have left.These people also believe,weirdly,that said people should leave their jobs and get another if they dare to stand up to their employer,instead of just saying "Yes Sir" and doffing their caps
Have you ever been checked for this condition? Don't worry if you have it...its endemic in the British population so no need for any treatment as its spreading rapidly and is normal for the UK....

 

[Goldfish62]

Well I could suggest you do what many on here suggest train crew do. Get another job.
Or maybe find a different method of getting to work.
Pity you don't have a good union to back you up when your employer treats you like s**t.
And that last line of yours sounds to me exactly like the feeling guards on Southern have had over the last few months.

Those comments are both selfish and seriously out of touch with reality. You criticise rightly criticise those who say railway staff should get another job if they don't like it, yet you tell others outside the industry to do the same if their lives are being disrupted. If that's typical of the attitude on the railways then that explains a lot.

You have also commented regarding the myth that just because someone is having issues with their job because of the ongoing poor service it is obviously because they don't have a union fighting for them. In the real world, yes there is on outside the rail industry, one of my colleagues in my office who relies on Southern is close to a breakdown due to the continual disruption. We work in the public sector, have strong union representation and all our jobs are under threat in the next few months.

 

[Minilad]

Those comments are both selfish and seriously out of touch with reality. You criticise rightly criticise those who say railway staff should get another job if they don't like it, yet you tell others outside the industry to do the same if their lives are being disrupted. If that's typical of the attitude on the railways then that explains a lot.

I didn't say that at all. I said I could. But I wouldn't. And once again I will say you have no idea about my attitude to "customers" so stop putting words into my mouth.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I believe this is a condition called "DailywailSunism"...A common condition amongst people who generally have no working rights,and believe no one else should have any or stand up for the few they have left.These people also believe,weirdly,that said people should leave their jobs and get another if they dare to stand up to their employer,instead of just saying "Yes Sir" and doffing their caps
Have you ever been checked for this condition? Don't worry if you have it...its endemic in the British population so no need for any treatment as its spreading rapidly and is normal for the UK....

Oh dear, someone who knows me not.. Let me remind you that at the age of 71, I am not in any employment market whatsoever. I retired in 2010 as the Senior Head of Projects at the consultancy and from 1995 to 2004, I headed our consultancy team in the Toronto office on a Canadian Hydro project, where we were the project lead. You have no knowledge whatsoever of the methodology used by me in staff matters and your "parrot-fashion" spouting of Socialist platitudes regarding employment of staff is laughable to say the least.

As is usually the case, I note the usual (on this website) blinkered reference to a certain right-wing newspaper which in itself is as meaningless to anyone referring to the "Socialist Worker" being mentioned as a similar quoted example. Are you not capable in producing a more educated view of expressing yourself in such matters? Why on earth do you feel that either the Daily Mail or the Sun would be of any interest to me whatsoever. My views on life have been formulated by the ability of my brain to make considered judgements without the need for references to any newspaper. You will find that this is what is called "logic".

So here I am, in an 18th century 6-bedroom property befitting my status as a now-retired successful Captain of Industry in the best rural part of what is known as "The Cheshire Golden Triangle", where globalised broker-managed finances mean that life is indeed good to me.

 

[BestWestern]

OUCH! .... when you have been owned

So you dropped a massive clanger ... and now result to abuse!



So any mention in that statement about safety ... NO! ... just jobs ... enough said

GTR jobs are so much more important than that of your customers .... cheers comrade!

:roll:

Might I suggest that you look up the word 'context'. The conversation was about a supposed expectation that the GTR strikers should reconsider their action because the commuters might lose their jobs. Nobody has ever, so far as I'm aware, stated that jobs are not part of the cause of the GTR issues, and my observation is merely that when your own job is at risk, some sort of tenuous threat to somebody else's unrelated employment by you striking is not high on the list of things to worry about.

There are, very obviously, significant safety concerns also. That would explain why Drivers are now also going on strike, don't you think? I apologise if you struggled to understand, I shall consider in future the potential need to recap the entire thread for those who find it more difficult than most to keep up.

 

[highdyke]

Drivers certainly *perceive* there is a safety risk, one which they will have to take legal responsibility for if things go wrong. I get that and have refused point blank to tow the line on a number of occasions for the same cause and more often than not I turned out to be correct. Of course, you are quickly branded a trouble maker. For me, a clean conscience is the name of the game, so it's water off a duck's back.

Clearly, if this strike is going ahead it is a game changer: Many days there will be little or no service, other days, especially Sundays the service will be minimal at best.

So the questions are now:

What would resolve as far as train crew are concerned? No DOO anywhere, No further extension of DOO, more cash, better technology to help, for example redesigning doors or CCTV?

For the public what do you think the government should do, if anything, especially if the two sides do not agree?

The railway already has a reputation for cost and inability to deliver major projects on time and budget, and it appears more and more than it is an industry that is fairly unmanageable. If managers/the government back down on this issue, how do you see the future of the industry?

 

[AlterEgo]

So, sounds like someone lost a finger at King's Cross as the guard saw them run for the train, fall under it so they pulled the tap.

If it was a DOO service that person would be dead.

"Sounds like".

Let's wait for the report.

 

[Carlisle]

Of course he does. The guard steps out on the platform whilst monitoring the platform, closes the doors, remains on the platform, and then closes the local door. At any of these points the guard can communicate with anyone on the platform. Should he be dispatching from a droplight window, he is in a position to still shout "move back" or whatnot to passengers". For the driver to communicate with anyone he has to phone the box, shut the desk down, secure the cab, walk back, tell them to move back, walk back to the cab, key in, phone the box and restart the process, the point at where enough time has elapsed to make the whole thing a farce, and for dangerous behaviour of the person or other people to resume.
..

I think the poster was referring to the pretty limited view at best the guard has of the platform train interface from behind a closed 377 door as it's about to depart/ is departing a station

 

[BestWestern]

The problem here is that there are many, many ways that 'the railway' could save money, by tackling genuine financial issues which are often hidden from sight. Instead, we saw a lazy 'report' from McNulty, acting as a government propagandist, which predictably said "get rid of staff". At pretty much exactly the same time, the industry was beginning to acknowledge and act on the newly appreciated risk of PTI incidents, and focussing in particular on that area. To manage that risk effectively requires people. The two issues are, unavoidably, at complete odds with one another. Those who actually carry out the daily task of operating the railways at the coalface, are in general agreed that single manning trains is simply not appropriate in the increasingly busy railway environment.

The railway sits on masses of needless financial waste. Others will be in a better position to quote specifics, but it is no secret that costs for everything from leasing life expired rolling stock, to leasing life expired revenue equipment, to getting Network Rail to come and change a lightbulb, are truly eye watering. As an example, TOCs pay vast sums to lease the current Avantix ticket equipment. It is old and inherently unreliable. If a machine fails, it must be sent to Atos for repair. A fixed fee is charged, which runs well into the hundreds. It doesn't matter that the TOC is already sinking £££s paying to use the stuff in the first place. And sometimes, it doesn't seem to matter that it comes back still defective. Replacement parts, such as batteries or a stylus for the PDA screen, are unfathomably expensive. The TOCs have little choice but to maintain an open chequebook with Atos' name on it, and the end result at best is poor quality, inadequate technology. No sensible industry looking to save money would deem such an arrangement to be appropriate.

Look at a newly installed signal. Even just a 'simple' peg, one signal on a post. Look at the enormous tonnage of metalwork that now often seems to be routinely installed with it, comprising a full access platform complete with fixed railings and safety barriers. How much does that cost on a network-wide basis? And why; how often do brand new LED signals need a bulb changed? And so on and so on and so on.... The real obscenity lies not with employing frontline staff to get the trains safely from A to B, but in the hidden costs that nobody ever probes, where massive sums of money are sent off to firm outside the railway for providing things at astronomical expense.

 

[AlterEgo]

Look at a newly installed signal. Even just a 'simple' peg, one signal on a post. Look at the enormous tonnage of metalwork that now often seems to be routinely installed with it, comprising a full access platform complete with fixed railings and safety barriers. How much does that cost on a network-wide basis? And why; how often do brand new LED signals need a bulb changed? And so on and so on and so on....

Surely that belt and braces approach is to ensure that staff are kept as safe as possible? Isn't this the same argument used by those arguing for the guard? In any case, if they went back to installing stuff in a parsimonious, no-frills manner, we'd just get the same argument that the money saved would go on profit margins rather than lower fares.

The retention of guards across all TOCs must cost well in the region of hundreds of millions of pounds each year. How many lives do they save? A few a year? What is the cost of that? What price do you put on each life?

 

[highdyke]

The problem here is that there are many, many ways that 'the railway' could save money, by tackling genuine financial issues which are often hidden from sight. Instead, we saw a lazy 'report' from McNulty, acting as a government propagandist, which predictably said "get rid of staff". At pretty much exactly the same time, the industry was beginning to acknowledge and act on the newly appreciated risk of PTI incidents, and focussing in particular on that area. To manage that risk effectively requires people. The two issues are, unavoidably, at complete odds with one another. Those who actually carry out the daily task of operating the railways at the coalface, are in general agreed that single manning trains is simply not appropriate in the increasingly busy railway environment.

The railway sits on masses of needless financial waste. Others will be in a better position to quote specifics, but it is no secret that costs for everything from leasing life expired rolling stock, to leasing life expired revenue equipment, to getting Network Rail to come and change a lightbulb, are truly eye watering. As an example, TOCs pay vast sums to lease the current Avantix ticket equipment. It is old and inherently unreliable. If a machine fails, it must be sent to Atos for repair. A fixed fee is charged, which runs well into the hundreds. It doesn't matter that the TOC is already sinking £££s paying to use the stuff in the first place. And sometimes, it doesn't seem to matter that it comes back still defective. Replacement parts, such as batteries or a stylus for the PDA screen, are unfathomably expensive. The TOCs have little choice but to maintain an open chequebook with Atos' name on it, and the end result at best is poor quality, inadequate technology. No sensible industry looking to save money would deem such an arrangement to be appropriate.

Look at a newly installed signal. Even just a 'simple' peg, one signal on a post. Look at the enormous tonnage of metalwork that now often seems to be routinely installed with it, comprising a full access platform complete with fixed railings and safety barriers. How much does that cost on a network-wide basis? And why; how often do brand new LED signals need a bulb changed? And so on and so on and so on.... The real obscenity lies not with employing frontline staff to get the trains safely from A to B, but in the hidden costs that nobody ever probes, where massive sums of money are sent off to firm outside the railway for providing things at astronomical expense.

I tend to agree with what you say more or less. There has been some movement on the silly signal gantries than only need heads changing once every ten years with the new lightweight signalling installed on the GN/GE joint line, Dorset coast and so on.

There's CIRAS for safety concerns, there probably ought to be another telephone number for silly waste concerns... or at least a working group between the unions, RDG, suppliers and the public.

 

[BestWestern]

Surely that belt and braces approach is to ensure that staff are kept as safe as possible? Isn't this the same argument used by those arguing for the guard? In any case, if they went back to installing stuff in a parsimonious, no-frills manner, we'd just get the same argument that the money saved would go on profit margins rather than lower fares.

The retention of guards across all TOCs must cost well in the region of hundreds of millions of pounds each year. How many lives do they save? A few a year? What is the cost of that? What price do you put on each life?

I would argue there is a good reason for the Guards. It is harder to justify a signal gantry that you could almost build a house on, for a signal highly unlikely to require maintenance.

In any case, if staff are to retained on board in some capacity, which is being used as a cornerstone of the pro-DOO argument, you'll be saving barely a fraction of the wage bill.

 

[Don King]

I think the poster was referring to the pretty limited view at best the guard has of the platform train interface from behind a closed 377 door as it's about to depart/ is departing a station

That doesn't change the fact that a guard has 2 occasions to deal with passengers on a platform. A driver has zero. Therefore it is more dangerous.

 

[AlterEgo]

I would argue there is a good reason for the Guards. It is harder to justify a signal gantry that you could almost build a house on, for a signal highly unlikely to require maintenance.

In any case, if staff are to retained on board in some capacity, which is being used as a cornerstone of the pro-DOO argument, you'll be saving barely a fraction of the wage bill.

Yes, thought I strongly suspect (along with most other posters) that the OBS-type role is a halfway house for the next generation of franchises, rather than a long-term solution.

 

[Dave1987]

The retention of guards across all TOCs must cost well in the region of hundreds of millions of pounds each year. How many lives do they save? A few a year? What is the cost of that? What price do you put on each life?

One guard on £30k a year, make it £40k with pensions contributions.

If one TOC has 300 guards, that's £12m per year. Hardly hundreds of millions is it! In the grand scheme of things getting rid of guards with save virtually nothing when you look at the money wasted elsewhere.

 

[Carlisle]

That doesn't change the fact that a guard has 2 occasions to deal with passengers on a platform. A driver has zero. Therefore it is more dangerous.

Once the train begins to pull away (when statistically the most serious type of incident is likely to occur) the guard has no better view than the drivers CCTV unless they're disptcing from a droplight

 

[Dave1987]

Once the train begins to pull away (when statistically the most serious type of incident is likely to occur) the guard has no better view than the drivers CCTV unless they're disptcing from a droplight

All services I drive with a guard they dispatch from a droplight so can watch the train all the way out of the platform. I've been stopped by a guard before departing with one on the bell because some kids thought it would be a good idea to see if they bounce themselves off the side of the train while I was pulling away. They only started doing this once I was moving. Guard stopped me straight away. Had I been DOO the kids could have killed or seriously themselves and I wouldn't have known anything about it.

 

[AlterEgo]

One guard on £30k a year, make it £40k with pensions contributions.

If one TOC has 300 guards, that's £12m per year. Hardly hundreds of millions is it! In the grand scheme of things getting rid of guards with save virtually nothing when you look at the money wasted elsewhere.

I said across all TOCs, Dave.

The cost of employing guards is also not limited to their salary and pension contributions. There are NI contributions, the cost of travel facilities, messing facilities, uniform, ancillary equipment (Avantix etc), commission where applicable, training, staff time off work (mat/pat), sick pay, death in service, and so on. You can nearly double the cost of a single staff member by accounting for these things.

 

[LowLevel]

I tend to agree with what you say more or less. There has been some movement on the silly signal gantries than only need heads changing once every ten years with the new lightweight signalling installed on the GN/GE joint line, Dorset coast and so on.

There's CIRAS for safety concerns, there probably ought to be another telephone number for silly waste concerns... or at least a working group between the unions, RDG, suppliers and the public.

I think you're entirely correct - I would love there to be a feeling of mutual trust between all parties and you could do great things. Unfortunately the Government doesn't do open discussion and debate, as is evident from the various other disputes within industries and professions it is cheerfully kicking in the nuts (medical, prison officers, police, fire etc), preferring to pull strings from the sidelines. The unions seem to have lost their ability to debate and provide a sensible coherent message (if they ever had it to be fair) , and the management act like East Germany, with a hand up their backsides and behaving in a generally unpleasant manner.

A good starting point would be the Government ceasing on one hand to declare that it wants rid of train guards by specifying it in contracts (but only quietly), and on the other hand saying it won't interfere in staffing by equally refusing to specify any replacements in later franchises.

It would provide a decent grounding of goodwill to come to agreement while dispelling any suspicion that they actually intend to follow their own hastily hidden reports about destaffing trains where possible and the lovely economic benefits that brings.

As someone who just wants to carry on doing a good job I find it miserable.

But I can't deny, as they've sparked it off and refuse to help solve any of the issues involve, that I would dearly love to see some more Government and civil service scalps over the matter and maybe ASLEF shutting the network down a bit will finally produce that - Pete Wilkinson being packed off on a plane back to Vienna for good would be a great start.

 

[ar10642]

I would dearly love to see some more Government and civil service scalps over the matter

You'd need an opposition that wasn't completely useless for that. The government will just bury it, unless we get mass protests or something.

 

[Dave1987]

I said across all TOCs, Dave.

The cost of employing guards is also not limited to their salary and pension contributions. There are NI contributions, the cost of travel facilities, messing facilities, uniform, ancillary equipment (Avantix etc), commission where applicable, training, staff time off work (mat/pat), sick pay, death in service, and so on. You can nearly double the cost of a single staff member by accounting for these things.

OK so let take a rough average of 300 guards for 10 TOC's, so that's 3000 guards. Say £50k a year to take account of pay, pensions, NI. Messing facilities are nothing as guards on the share the same facilities as drivers. Uniform costs are negligible. Equipment costs won't change as RPI's carry the ticket machines as well. Commission benefits the company as it encourages guards to sell more tickets and is negligible anyway. The rest are also negligible as well.

So 3000 x £50k = £150m So where's the hundreds of millions of pounds coming from? That doesn't even take into account all the extra revenue from ticket sales that the guards generate!

 

[Carlisle]

I think you're entirely correct - I would love there to be a feeling of mutual trust between all parties and you could do great things. Unfortunately the Government doesn't do open discussion and debate, as is evident from the various other disputes within industries and professions it is cheerfully kicking in the nuts (medical, prison officers, police, fire etc), preferring to pull strings from the sidelines. The unions seem to have lost their ability to debate and provide a sensible coherent message (if they ever had it to be fair) , and the management act like East Germany, with a hand up their backsides and behaving in a generally unpleasant manner.

A good starting point would be the Government ceasing on one hand to declare that it wants rid of train guards by specifying it in contracts (but only quietly), and on the other hand saying it won't interfere in staffing by equally refusing to specify any replacements in later franchises.

It would provide a decent grounding of goodwill to come to agreement while dispelling any suspicion that they actually intend to follow their own hastily hidden reports about destaffing trains where possible and the lovely economic benefits that brings.

As someone who just wants to carry on doing a good job I find it miserable.

But I can't deny, as they've sparked it off and refuse to help solve any of the issues involve, that I would dearly love to see some more Government and civil service scalps over the matter and maybe ASLEF shutting the network down a bit will finally produce that - Pete Wilkinson being packed off on a plane back to Vienna for good would be a great start.

I think you've missed the reality here that the railway unions have been getting more extreme,hardline and moving further to the left very gradually for the last decade or two, and if we're to get the kind of cooperation you'd like to happen,it would entail them being more realistic, not just government kneeling down, kissing their boots and apologising for annoying such powerful organisations and promising not to do it again

 

[ANorthernGuard]

OK so let take a rough average of 300 guards for 10 TOC's, so that's 3000 guards. Say £50k a year to take account of pay, pensions, NI. Messing facilities are nothing as guards on the share the same facilities as drivers. Uniform costs are negligible. Equipment costs won't change as RPI's carry the ticket machines as well. Commission benefits the company as it encourages guards to sell more tickets and is negligible anyway. The rest are also negligible as well.

So 3000 x £50k = £150m So where's the hundreds of millions of pounds coming from? That doesn't even take into account all the extra revenue from ticket sales that the guards generate!

So lets say the average Guard takes about 2K in tickets per week (Can obviously vary) so thats 104k per year times that by 3000 = 312 Million in revenue the average Guard is on around 35k with overtime and commision so that equals 105 Million So net worth of a Guards on the Network 207 Million if you call 10k of that Salary going back to the Treasury thats another 30 Million back. Just food for thought

 

[Don King]

I think you've missed the reality here that the railway unions have been getting more extreme and moving further to the left very gradually for the last decade or two, and if we're to get the kind of cooperation you'd like to happen,it would entail them being more realistic, not just government kneeling down, kissing their boots and apologising for annoying such powerful organisations and promising not to do it again

The fact that privatisation and outsourcing of policing, parts of the armed forces, search and rescue, court services and fire services has either happened or been seriously discussed, not to mention plans to offshore council jobs abroad (not yet implemented as far as I know), not to mention the push for TTIP / TPP with job offshoring and secret arbitration tribunals for multinational corporations to sue taxpayers outside of the national legal systems, would suggest that successive governments have moved economically to the right, and taken on a more extreme position.

DOO is not a left or right issue.

 

[Chrisgr31]

I think it is interesting to compare the union officers from ASLEF and RMT, the former invariably wearing a jacket and tie, the latter not, the former not ranting etc.

I think there is an increasing realisation by passengers that this is a political dispute and they are losin patience with all those involved, staff, management and government.

The reality is Southern can't operate the service on non-strike days. It's also a fact that the franchise is one of the few which required no subsidy as it pays its way. Or rather it did.

The staff have lost all respect for thei management and many appear to be looking for ways to get out.

The only real way for this to be settled is for the DfT to back down, get the staff working, and then work on staff morale. If the DfT win then staff morale will remain at rock bottom with staff shortages left, right and centre.

 

[Robertj21a]

Drivers certainly *perceive* there is a safety risk, one which they will have to take legal responsibility for if things go wrong. I get that and have refused point blank to tow the line on a number of occasions for the same cause and more often than not I turned out to be correct. Of course, you are quickly branded a trouble maker. For me, a clean conscience is the name of the game, so it's water off a duck's back.

Clearly, if this strike is going ahead it is a game changer: Many days there will be little or no service, other days, especially Sundays the service will be minimal at best.

So the questions are now:

What would resolve as far as train crew are concerned? No DOO anywhere, No further extension of DOO, more cash, better technology to help, for example redesigning doors or CCTV?

For the public what do you think the government should do, if anything, especially if the two sides do not agree?

The railway already has a reputation for cost and inability to deliver major projects on time and budget, and it appears more and more than it is an industry that is fairly unmanageable. If managers/the government back down on this issue, how do you see the future of the industry?

Some interesting issues, thank you.

To my mind, the government shouldn't be encouraged to do anything. Despite some silliness from the DfT, the railways are run by managers, not government - it's for the managers to resolve any disputes.

I can see that some extra facilities would still be helpful to enable more DOO to be implemented as safely as is realistically possible.

I sincerely hope that 'more cash' isn't going to be the answer to any of the problems - the staff have made it perfectly clear that it should all be about safety, it's not about money.

If 'managers/government were to back down' it suggests that we are heading back to the Dark Ages of Scargill etc where unions believed that they could do whatever they wanted. Clearly that's not going to happen this time around.

 

[Dave1987]

Some interesting issues, thank you.

To my mind, the government shouldn't be encouraged to do anything. Despite some silliness from the DfT, the railways are run by managers, not government - it's for the managers to resolve any disputes.

I can see that some extra facilities would still be helpful to enable more DOO to be implemented as safely as is realistically possible.

I sincerely hope that 'more cash' isn't going to be the answer to any of the problems - the staff have made it perfectly clear that it should all be about safety, it's not about money.

If 'managers/government were to back down' it suggests that we are heading back to the Dark Ages of Scargill etc where unions believed that they could do whatever they wanted. Clearly that's not going to happen this time around.

What complete and utter nonsense! I was speaking to a union rep a while back about how management/union relationships happened years ago. They said that they would usually have a chat down the pub where both sides would put their points across and a mutually beneficial arrangement would be agreed upon. Now with the modern breed of management the meetings are all formal. Instead of both sides working to a mutually acceptable conclusion both sides are seeking an edge over the other. Your rhetoric of 'managers/government not wanting to back down' stinks of government wanting to get one over the unions to nullify them. There is only one reason why you would seek to nullify a union and not work with it and that is to introduce changes that would harm the staff without opposition. As far as I can see you are part of the 'Race to the bottom' that is slowly destroying this country.

 

[Robertj21a]

What complete and utter nonsense! I was speaking to a union rep a while back about how management/union relationships happened years ago. They said that they would usually have a chat down the pub where both sides would put their points across and a mutually beneficial arrangement would be agreed upon. Now with the modern breed of management the meetings are all formal. Instead of both sides working to a mutually acceptable conclusion both sides are seeking an edge over the other. Your rhetoric of 'managers/government not wanting to back down' stinks of government wanting to get one over the unions to nullify them. There is only one reason why you would seek to nullify a union and not work with it and that is to introduce changes that would harm the staff without opposition. As far as I can see you are part of the 'Race to the bottom' that is slowly destroying this country.

Thank you for such a silly outburst. It seems that you haven't bothered to read that I was responding to the earlier question - that included the wording........'If managers/government back down'.
Now perhaps you'll get off your high horse.

Incidentally, it sounds like you didn't have to live through the Scargill era. If you had it might have been easier for you to comprehend where I was coming from.

 

[FordFocus]

Once the train begins to pull away (when statistically the most serious type of incident is likely to occur) the guard has no better view than the drivers CCTV unless they're disptcing from a droplight

HORRAY!!

The message has finally reached.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Oh dear, someone who knows me not.. Let me remind you that at the age of 71, I am not in any employment market whatsoever. I retired in 2010 as the Senior Head of Projects at the consultancy and from 1995 to 2004, I headed our consultancy team in the Toronto office on a Canadian Hydro project, where we were the project lead. You have no knowledge whatsoever of the methodology used by me in staff matters and your "parrot-fashion" spouting of Socialist platitudes regarding employment of staff is laughable to say the least.

As is usually the case, I note the usual (on this website) blinkered reference to a certain right-wing newspaper which in itself is as meaningless to anyone referring to the "Socialist Worker" being mentioned as a similar quoted example. Are you not capable in producing a more educated view of expressing yourself in such matters? Why on earth do you feel that either the Daily Mail or the Sun would be of any interest to me whatsoever. My views on life have been formulated by the ability of my brain to make considered judgements without the need for references to any newspaper. You will find that this is what is called "logic".

So here I am, in an 18th century 6-bedroom property befitting my status as a now-retired successful Captain of Industry in the best rural part of what is known as "The Cheshire Golden Triangle", where globalised broker-managed finances mean that life is indeed good to me.

Absolutely nothing to do with this topic or anything railway related just like most of your posts in this topic.