Southern DOO: ASLEF members vote 79.1% for revised deal

[313103]

Just wait there will be comments saying no point in making it work it's a waste of time the job will be gone and no similar jobs will exist

That may or may not be true, but one can only gauge what is likely to happen based on previous experience and history. Many in the industry have seen these roles come and go like the revolving door. Very, very few have lasted, i hope for those permanently forced into these roles it does work.

 

[JamesTT]

That may or may not be true, but one can only gauge what is likely to happen based on previous experience and history. Many in the industry have seen these roles come and go like the revolving door. Very, very few have lasted, i hope for those permanently forced into these roles it does work.

So what about the Scotrail ticket examiners? It seems lots of posters on this thread are so adamant the OBS role will fail, that they would rather they were proved right than wrong

 

[313103]

So what about the Scotrail ticket examiners? It seems lots of posters on this thread are so adamant the OBS role will fail, that they would rather they were proved right than wrong

The scotrail example you have given and the one people mention is the exception rather then the rule, one could argue this was tried before on Southern's sister company Gatwick Express and we all know what happened there don't we.

I don't want to proved wrong, i want to be proved right that the only reason for this taking place is not because its going to create a better environment for passengers, but a tactic to reduce the number of staff, a tactic to 'eventually' reduce the salary of said staff, and erosion of terms and conditions.

 

[craigybagel]

The Scotrail TE's still exist because there is an agreement in writing that if they don't exist, Scotrail will get fined. As far as we are aware, there is no such agreement in place with Southern, and therefore no reason to expect things to be the same with them as it is with Scotrail.

Remember - this whole thing only makes financial sense if the OBS's are done away with. It doesn't make sense in Scotland to do away with the TE's because if they do they'll be fined. And rightly or wrongly, the TOCs and the DFT want to make money.

 

[JamesTT]

The scotrail example you have given and the one people mention is the exception rather then the rule, one could argue this was tried before on Southern's sister company Gatwick Express and we all know what happened there don't we.

I don't want to proved wrong, i want to be proved right that the only reason for this taking place is not because its going to create a better environment for passengers, but a tactic to reduce the number of staff, a tactic to 'eventually' reduce the salary of said staff, and erosion of terms and conditions.

Re Gatwick Express how many received a P45? And it seems you are saying you want people to be out of work so you can say I told you so on this thread.

 

[313103]

Re Gatwick Express how many received a P45? And it seems you are saying you want people to be out of work so you can say I told you so on this thread.

I have no idea how many received a P45 do you?

Well ok then if that is the angle your going for i would already be proved right on job numbers already. Some Conductors have already left the industry and that is indeed a fact.

 

[a_c_skinner]

With the greatest of respect chap, if you'd been spat on, sh*t on and publicly smeared and humiliated by your own employer just for wanting to continue to do the job they employed you to do, you'd be rather lacking in self motivation too.

I am sorry to say that the very variable enthusiasm of on train staff spreads across more than one TOC and pre-dates this current dispute. A minority of staff seem content to do very little.

 

[AlterEgo]

I am sorry to say that the very variable enthusiasm of on train staff spreads across more than one TOC and pre-dates this current dispute. A minority of staff seem content to do very little.

I share this view.

By way of the forum's nature, rail staff on forum are a self-selecting bunch, who share wider concerns or interests about the industry. They'll be interested in their jobs and how it fits with the wider picture, and are probably more likely to be keen, helpful, and open to new experiences.

There is a significant proportion of rail staff who are none of these things. We rarely hear from them on here. I'd say staff motivation in the industry is on a par with retail. There are lots and lots of staff at every grade on the railway who range from uninterested/ambivalent to - at the extreme - malevolent towards the railway and/or its users.

The problem's causes are threefold:

1) Staff pay and perks are pretty good at most grades. There is little incentive to look outside the railway for advancement. Most grades can "see" the route to promotion to the "next grade", if they wanted to advance themselves. The railway is a good place for getting life experience but grades like the Guard don't equip the post holder with skills or qualifications which would gain a similar rate of pay outside the industry. The skills etc gained are wholly relevant only to the railway, leading me onto point 2...

2) The railway is a unique industry with layers of operational complexity and cultural idiosyncrasies. It is easy for staff to feel very comfortable. Once I knew I "had the feel for" the railway I didn't think I would ever leave. (I did, but hey!)

3) The big one. Management on the railway is completely s***e. I believe strongly against management fast track schemes in environments like the railway where legitimacy and respect comes from operational experience. Respect should be earned and not demanded. That sounds like quite an old-fashioned view from someone like me but it was something drummed into me when I was an air cadet and which I have never forgotten. Management - and by this I mean middle management or line management - on the railway is too often done remotely. There is little contact or supervision of tasks. There is also no great will to try and change that culture.


Number 3) can best be applied to GTR. It's a poor TOC with a serious image problem. Regardless of the rights or wrongs of DOO their implementation of it has been wrong-headed. I thought the strikes were wrong and dumb too, but I understood the feelings of resentment towards GTR. I was lucky to work for two TOCs who mostly cared about their staff (union-busting antics at VTWC aside); I cannot say I'd feel the same about working for GTR.

 

[BestWestern]

I am sorry to say that the very variable enthusiasm of on train staff spreads across more than one TOC and pre-dates this current dispute. A minority of staff seem content to do very little.

Agreed, as with most jobs. However, any expectation that OBS grade staff at GTR who were formally Conductors should be expected to greet their new job roles with enthusiasm and zest, are patently unrealistic. Management have utterly destroyed staff morale, as well as any public or industry respect for their TOC. It us to be expected that completely demoralised workforce will do little more than the bare essentials, which in the case of OBS is pretty much nothing.

 

[HH]

The Scotrail TE's still exist because there is an agreement in writing that if they don't exist, Scotrail will get fined. As far as we are aware, there is no such agreement in place with Southern, and therefore no reason to expect things to be the same with them as it is with Scotrail.

Remember - this whole thing only makes financial sense if the OBS's are done away with. It doesn't make sense in Scotland to do away with the TE's because if they do they'll be fined. And rightly or wrongly, the TOCs and the DFT want to make money.

You're absolutely right about the TEs, but as for financial sense, at the start it didn't depend on getting rid of the OBS role. Now, I don't think it makes financial sense at all, given the amount of revenue lost and the amount of compensation paid to passengers. DfT (or more specifically camp Wilko) will be hoping that the GTR solution will make further deals easier to achieve in order to justify the cost.

In the short to medium term, retaining OBS will depend on how much revenue they collect. In the long term we will see more automation with tickets on phones and smartcards and I can't see the role being retained on commuter services. Their biggest hope is that the challenge on discrimination against disabled passengers bears fruit in court.

 

[physics34]

just recieved the deal in the post. now for a read.................

 

[Barn]

just recieved the deal in the post. now for a read.................

It's going to leak soon so you might as well take a photo and give RailUK a word exclusive scoop...

 

[JamesTT]

If any pay increase takes southern drivers to a level much greater than those who drive for TL/GN get. I think those who were in the conductor grade could justifibably feel they have been sold out

 

[Bromley boy]

I share this view.

By way of the forum's nature, rail staff on forum are a self-selecting bunch, who share wider concerns or interests about the industry. They'll be interested in their jobs and how it fits with the wider picture, and are probably more likely to be keen, helpful, and open to new experiences.

There is a significant proportion of rail staff who are none of these things. We rarely hear from them on here. I'd say staff motivation in the industry is on a par with retail. There are lots and lots of staff at every grade on the railway who range from uninterested/ambivalent to - at the extreme - malevolent towards the railway and/or its users.

The problem's causes are threefold:

1) Staff pay and perks are pretty good at most grades. There is little incentive to look outside the railway for advancement. Most grades can "see" the route to promotion to the "next grade", if they wanted to advance themselves. The railway is a good place for getting life experience but grades like the Guard don't equip the post holder with skills or qualifications which would gain a similar rate of pay outside the industry. The skills etc gained are wholly relevant only to the railway, leading me onto point 2...

2) The railway is a unique industry with layers of operational complexity and cultural idiosyncrasies. It is easy for staff to feel very comfortable. Once I knew I "had the feel for" the railway I didn't think I would ever leave. (I did, but hey!)

3) The big one. Management on the railway is completely s***e. I believe strongly against management fast track schemes in environments like the railway where legitimacy and respect comes from operational experience. Respect should be earned and not demanded. That sounds like quite an old-fashioned view from someone like me but it was something drummed into me when I was an air cadet and which I have never forgotten. Management - and by this I mean middle management or line management - on the railway is too often done remotely. There is little contact or supervision of tasks. There is also no great will to try and change that culture.


Number 3) can best be applied to GTR. It's a poor TOC with a serious image problem. Regardless of the rights or wrongs of DOO their implementation of it has been wrong-headed. I thought the strikes were wrong and dumb too, but I understood the feelings of resentment towards GTR. I was lucky to work for two TOCs who mostly cared about their staff (union-busting antics at VTWC aside); I cannot say I'd feel the same about working for GTR.

The above is absolutely spot-on.

3 is most definitely the biggy, and I would emphasise extremely poor communication between management and operational staff as being a key aspect of this. There's a widespread perception that decisions are made behind closed doors with little attempt being made to consult with operational staff. This breeds a negative atmosphere in which staff become very cynical and mistrustful of managers and leads to a "us and them" culture. Drivers who become driver managers are seen as turncoats who have betrayed their colleagues and are generally viewed with disdain. It isn't seen in a positive light as a "promotion" in the way as moving from an operational role to a management role might be seen in most other industries.

Of the course the nature of operational jobs does lend itself to this type of culture. Drivers, in particular, will generally only interact with other drivers when they book on and will have little interaction with other operational grades and even less with management.

I can see the other side to this. Operational railstaff generally can have a tendency to become institutionalised, cynical and must be extremely difficult to manage. The franchise model doesn't help with this. Drivers/guards who have been in the job for a long period will have seen several franchises (and sets of senior managers) come and go, each promising the earth but with very little actually changing on the ground.

 

[physics34]

No mention of pay.

 

[JamesTT]

No mention of pay.

I think there should have been a increase to bring you inline with TL/GN drivers. I take it by saying no mention of pay you mean any form of financial recompense?

 

[sandyravage]

Is it the capitulation social media is reporting ?

 

[sandyravage]

Just seen the agreement . Aslef have crumbled .

 

[D1009]

In the short to medium term, retaining OBS will depend on how much revenue they collect. In the long term we will see more automation with tickets on phones and smartcards and I can't see the role being retained on commuter services. Their biggest hope is that the challenge on discrimination against disabled passengers bears fruit in court.

Sorry, I fail to see how automation with tickets on phones and smartcards will reduce the need for revenue protection.

 

[Solent&Wessex]

Sorry, I fail to see how automation with tickets on phones and smartcards will reduce the need for revenue protection.

Because, in the cold hard light of day, with all the Advance tickets and automation there is, less people buy tickets on trains. Less ticket sales on trains = less revenue generated by the on train staff. When the financial people look at this, and with them no longer being essential for the train to run, then they won't be deemed necessary.

 

[Barn]

Just seen the agreement . Aslef have crumbled .

Do you have a link please?

 

[theking]

Just seen the agreement . Aslef have crumbled .

If this is true I hope the members vote it down.

 

[sandyravage]

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10210853642513585&id=1127381984

My personal view
THE MOST SHOCKING SELLOUT SINCE THE MINERS STRIKE.RMT members have been betrayed by the ASLEF leadership and the TUC.
ASLEF MEMBERS PLEASE REJECT THIS APPALLING DEAL.
The deal ASLEF negotiated at the TUC and recommended to ASLEF members does not guarantee a second person on a train let alone a second safety critical person. It merely says that an On Board Supervisor will be rostered and allows a train to run with a driver alone in all the cases listed below. This clearly breaks Aslefs promise not to extend Driver Only Operation or Driver Controlled Operation. I appeal to all ASLEF members to reject this deal which clearly undermines our guards who have sacrificed 28 days pay to fight against just such a sellout of their positions. This proposed deal abandons the disabled and vulnerable and gives them no guarantee of being able to board a train let alone guarantee the safety of passengers. Did they get up an hour early to construct this monstrosity? Both unions were offered this rubbish in the summer last year and both correctly rejected it, absolutely nothing has been added to improve the offer since then.

 

[Carlisle]

Because, in the cold hard light of day, with all the Advance tickets and automation there is, less people buy tickets on trains. Less ticket sales on trains = less revenue generated by the on train staff. When the financial people look at this, and with them no longer being essential for the train to run, then they won't be deemed necessary.

If you dispense completely with on train revenue collection you'll need more staff on barriers etc at most stations (first to last train) in order to prevent fare evasion growing hugely once word gets around nobody ever checks their tickets /passes

 

[Domh245]

Just for members without Facebook, the contents of the picture are as such:

Agreed reasons to run without an OBS
The following are circumstances when Control may require the serivce to run wihtout the OBS
Before applying any of the following the Resource Manager/OBS Coordinator must try to provide a replacement OBS for the service, or part of the service, where reasonably practicable

a) OBS absent/late on duty, or unauthorised absence, at the start of or during the duty, and where there is no alternative cover available to run this service
b) Late notice OBS sickness/emergency leave and where there is no alternative cover available to run this service
c) OBS delayed whilst 'passing' to work
d) OBS displaced by late running or service disruption

Should c) or d) occur, arrangement must be made to restore OBS presence as soon as is reasonably possible

e) OBS unable to continue duty having commenced booked diagram (for example through sickness or assault)
f) Dirver or OBS error (eg If the OBS is left behind by the driver and/or OBS error, or OBS misreading roster/diagram
g) OBS has to leave the service, to cope with a passenger incident or civil emergency

A lot of "where practicals" in there, which strikes me as a bit odd given that they were burned by this on GatEx

 

[Solent&Wessex]

If you dispense completely with on train revenue collection you'll need more staff on barriers etc at most stations (first to last train) in order to prevent fare evasion growing hugely once word gets around nobody ever checks their tickets /passes

Well the RSSB report on DOO seems quite content to not bother with collecting revenue on trains.

Of course what gates don't do is detect people using Advance tickets on the wrong trains, tickets being used on the wrong route, people with railcard tickets but without railcards, adults using child tickets etc etc etc.

Ticket revenue will depend on whether there is a second person on board the train, and what his/her duties are. The impact of this will be greatest for
journeys between two unmanned stations. Currently, 92% of ticket revenue
comes from journeys between two manned stations, so a potential loss of
revenue should not be a major issue.

 

[OxtedSignaller]

Has anyone seen a copy of the full agreement anywhere?

 

[jordan1985]

Ere ya go.

 

[WatcherZero]

RMT reaction to TUC/Southern Rail betrayal
4 February 2017
RMT Press Office:
RMT reaction to TUC/Southern Rail betrayal of safety and the conductor grade.
General Secretary Mick Cash said;
*
"This so-called agreement is a shocking and historical betrayal presided over by the TUC of not only the conductor grade and drivers , but also passengers, including disabled passengers, who have lost the guarantee of a second member of staff on their trains.
*
"This abysmal document lists a whole host of areas where a a train can leave without a second member of staff that will leave both the driver and passengers exposed and vulnerable and* which also* represents a thin end of the wedge that will lead to the destaffing of trains.
*
"Loyal and dedicated conductors, who have fought for safety for over a year have had the legs kicked from under them by those who are supposed to be on their side. Passengers and staff alike have been sold out by a stitch up cooked up in Congress House by the TUC and the bosses whilst Southern,* one of the most anti union and hated companies of recent times, is laughing all the way to the bank and have been given a free run to rip up the safety rule book in the name of profits.
*
"This is not a deal it is a disgrace and the RMT dispute remains on and we will fight this shocking betrayal with every tool at our disposal.
*
"We remain availble for talks "
*
Ends

http://www.rmt.org.uk/news/rmt-reaction-to-tucsouthern-rail-betrayal/

 

[WatcherZero]

Has anyone seen a copy of the full agreement anywhere?

Driver Only Operation and related issues on Southern services: Agreement between GTR and ASLEF

GTR and ASLEF agree to work together to develop improved safe systems of work. We confirm that changes to working methods will be dealt with through the agreed collective bargaining procedures.
To this end, and by agreement:

1. GTR will guarantee that drivers are supported by committing to diagram and roster an OBS for all services that previously had a conductor on 21st August 2016. GTR reaffirms its commitment to maintaining an establishment based on a ratio of 2:1 OBS’s to running turns. All services will normally operate with both a driver and an OBS. However, both GTR and ASLEF recognise that there are circumstances when, for the benefits of passengers, the overall service and employees, Southern services covered by this arrangement will run without an OBS as set out in appendix A.

2. For services within the scope of this agreement, the driver is responsible for the control, movement and dispatch of the train. However, where in degraded conditions, an OBS is present they may, if holding relevant competency, assist in the dispatch of the train, if required and authorised by Control to do so. The company will offer to provide OBSs the opportunity to maintain existing competence or be trained to undertake the relevant specific degraded safety critical task. This is set out in appendix B.

3. GTR and ASLEF commit to establish a Joint Working Party to work together to review the current and future concerns over the operation of DOO on Southern services as set out in appendix C.

4. GTR and ASLEF agree to work together on technology improvement as set out in appendix D.

5. GTR and ASLEF agree that the interlock system is of prime importance for ensuring the doors are securely closed, and is an essential element of the safe system of train dispatch. GTR affirms that they operate a safe system of work for the dispatch of trains which includes the traction interlock system and final safety check in accordance with the Rule Book. The Rule Book is the paramount instruction to drivers.

6. GTR and ASLEF jointly agree to explore the scope and feasibility of an indemnity scheme for drivers.

7. GTR is increasing its Driver Establishment over the course of this franchise to reflect the needs of the services.

8. ASLEF welcomes the GTR relocation policy for redundant drivers in the rail freight sector relocating to GTR as set out in appendix E.

9. GTR and ASLEF have agreed a joint process on the restoration of positive relationships as set out in appendix F, including a commitment to joint training. The parties are also committed to jointly work to develop effective part time working, family friendly and employment practices.

10. The Fail to Agrees (FTAs) recorded as a result of the extension of DOO on new routes are resolved as a result of this agreement. It is recognised that the FTAs from Barnham, London Bridge and Victoria contained additional elements which will require further consideration. Therefore discussion and conclusions on these issues will take place at the earliest opportunity.

11. GTR and ASLEF are proud of the fact that all on-board staff will be directly employed by GTR and not employed on any casual arrangements.

12. This agreement applies to those services set out in appendix G.
Dated………………………………………….
………………………………………………..…. On behalf of GTR
………………………………………..…………. On behalf of ASLEF

No appendix though