SWR Strike Action: Strikes every day in December except 1st, 12th, 25th & 26th

[387star]

https://www.rmt.org.uk/news/rmt-announces-five-days-of-strike-action-on-swr/

Thought it was over?

30 May 2019 RMT Press Office: RMT announces five days of strike action as SWR drag heels on guard guarantee RAIL UNION RMT today announced five days of strike action on South Western Railway – accusing the company of dragging their heels in protracted talks over the guard guarantee after the union suspended action back in February in good faith based on written assurances over the rolling out of driver only operation. As a result of SWR’s failure to move forwards on an agreement RMT members will take action as follows: We instruct our SWR Guard, Commercial Guard and Driver members to take industrial action by not booking on for duty between 00:01 to 23:59 hours on the following dates. Tuesday 18th June 2019 Wednesday 19th June 2019 Thursday 20th June 2019 Friday 21st June 2019 Saturday 22nd June 2019 Back in February – after a long and hard fight by RMT members – the train company pledged that “each passenger train shall operate with a guard with safety critical competencies.” These specific competencies were to be agreed by the RMT and SWR. It was that promise that allowed RMT to suspend the action but since then it has been stalemate with the company rowing back on their public pledges. RMT General Secretary Mick Cash said: “Our members are angry and frustrated that despite suspending action in good faith, and entering into talks in a positive and constructive manner, South Western Railway have dragged their heels and failed to bolt down an agreement that matches up to our expectations on the guard guarantee. “For more than three months we have sought to negotiate a conclusion to this dispute and it is wholly down to the management side that the core issue of the safety critical competencies and the role of the guard has not been signed off. It is because of that crucial failure by SWR that we have had no option but to lift the suspension and move back into strike action.” Ends.

 

[Monty]

Just read the statement from the RMT, if you reading through the normal guff the jist of it I got was over the last 5 months or so there have been many meetings between the union and the company, including a visit to see the trains themselves. During this time the RMT proposed a method of working which was rejected by the company, yet the company have actually yet to make their own plans clear regarding a method of working. If this is true the last few months have been wasted and its bloody naughty of the company to have done this, they need to put their cards on the table and show us what they want.

 

[infobleep]

Just read the statement from the RMT, if you readyl through the normal guff the jist of it I got was over the last 5 months or so there have been many meetings between the union and the company, including a visit to see the trains themselves. During this time the RMT proposed a method of working which was rejected by the company, yet the company have actually yet to make their own plans clear regarding a method of working. If this is true the last few months have been wasted and its bloody naughty of the company to have done this, they need to put their cards on the table and show us what they want.

I thought it had been resolved but clearly I misremembered the events.

I've not seen the press release but based on what you've written, it sound alike to see what the issue is, one has to try hard to work out what it is, as it's a badly written press release once more. Don't do themsleves any favours being like this with thier press releases. This has been done to death before though and I can't see the RMT changing any time soon.

Shame really. Still this means I won't be voting for my Conservative MP, if their is a snap election, as they support running trains without guards. I disagree with them that it should happen. This too has been done to death of course.

If the strikes go ahead, be interesting to see what kind of service runs, now that they have a modified timetable with the 300 extra services. I doubt they will be able to just use the previous strike timetable.

 

[swt_passenger]

I've not seen the press release but based on what you've written...

Isn’t the first post in the thread the RMT press release copied and pasted?

 

[Bromley boy]

I've not seen the press release but based on what you've written, it sound alike to see what the issue is, one has to try hard to work out what it is, as it's a badly written press release once more.

It seems clear enough to me?!

They suspended the previous action pending an agreement to have guards on all trains, and the company has dragged its heels in thrashing out a formal agreement to this effect.

At least there isn’t any of the usual ranting about nationalisation/foreign ownership etc.

 

[infobleep]

It seems clear enough to me?!

They suspended the previous action pending an agreement to have guards on all trains, and the company has dragged its heels in thrashing out a formal agreement to this effect.

At least there isn’t any of the usual ranting about nationalisation/foreign ownership etc.

Your right there isn't. I've just read it. For some reason I didn't notice it above. Although I see the first post was edited so I can't say for certain if the press rleaase existed when I firet read it. Perhaps it didn't exist when I typed my post. Note the page doesn't refresh whilst I'm typing.if it was written then I just didn't notice it.

I was going on what Monty said.

Just read the statement from the RMT, if you readyl through the normal guff the jist of it.....

 

[Kite159]

Here we go again with more pointless and damaging strikes.

Was the idea the RMT tired to enforce basically nothing changes with the new stock with the guards opening the doors?

 

[infobleep]

Here we go again with more pointless and damaging strikes.

Was the idea the RMT tired to enforce basically nothing changes with the new stock with the guards opening the doors?

I thought the idea was the drivers were to open the doors but the guards would remain on the services.

 

[Meerkat]

My biased eyes read that press release as saying that the RMT have been ‘negotiating’ for ages, but that negotiation is a fixed RMT position that SWR are supposed to agree to. So more a demand than a negotiation.
Unless the RMT have offered a compromise?

 

[ABDeltic]

Seems the strike has been called to coincide with Royal Ascot. They always seem to pick days to cause maximum disruption.

 

[SWRtrain_fan]

They always seem to pick days to cause maximum disruption.

Yeah, even last summer when there were strikes on SWR, the RMT chose to do it in the summer when many people like to the beach e.t.c. They are definitely trying to pick days which cause maximum disruption.

 

[SWRtrain_fan]

Haven't SWR guaranteed a guard on every service? I really don't understand why the RMT are still going on with these useless strikes...

 

[ComUtoR]

Haven't SWR guaranteed a guard on every service? I really don't understand why the RMT are still going on with these useless strikes...

Please read post #1

 

[Darandio]

Please read post #1

I'm not sure it will change the opinion of someone named 'SWRtrain_fan'!

 

[hwl]

Please read post #1

I suspect more to do with SWR not guaranteeing that guards will open and close the doors (i.e. the role of the guard) than not guaranteeing a guard with safety competencies on every train.

 

[OxtedSignaller]

From what I understand the RMT keep moving the goalposts about what they want. It started off they wanted a Guard rostered on every train and then their position on all TOCs has now moved to the fact they want to retain sole door control as well. I am not going to rehash the whole argument as it's been done to death. But to me it is just arguing over silly details... why not move to having non commercial guards doing ticket and oyster checks, and being able to be present in the main vestibule of the train which I imagine they will once the new trains are implemented as they will not need to use cab controls. Gurantee guards livelihoods maybe even give them a pay increase for dealing with the new technology and way of working and keep the service going.

It is very noble of the RMT to campaign for this conventional railway they seem to want but surely companies should be free to choose their method of working and change accepted with consultation and agreement.

All this safety competency talk is nonsense. Either they are a Guard/Conductor/Train Manager as defined in the rule book or they are a non safety critical OBS type role. If they are talking about keeping a Guard on every train it will have to be a fully competent person who can carry out the responsibilities and actions defined in the rulebook

 

[maxbarnish]

Would someone experienced be able to offer me some wisdom on this please - I am no rail expert but a regular user. I have booked an advance ticket Cranbrook CBK to Welling WLI for one of what transpires to be the planned strike dates. The ticket was booked before the strike was called. My confirmation shows the normal itinerary. My station Cranbrook usually receives only replacement buses during strikes - sometimes they authorise what would usually be a routing breach by going via Paddington not Waterloo, I will look out for that on website nearer time. But i. would any Delay Repay be still based on the timetable at the time of booking i.e. my booking confirmation, or any revised timetable that is later introduced? ii. Will the duty to get me to my destination still exist based on my booking confirmation? It does look likely I'd make the last train connection in London onto my destination of Welling even with an hour plus delay, as some leeway - but I can't guarantee.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

Would someone experienced be able to offer me some wisdom on this please - I am no rail expert but a regular user. I have booked an advance ticket Cranbrook CBK to Welling WLI for one of what transpires to be the planned strike dates. The ticket was booked before the strike was called. My confirmation shows the normal itinerary. My station Cranbrook usually receives only replacement buses during strikes - sometimes they authorise what would usually be a routing breach by going via Paddington not Waterloo, I will look out for that on website nearer time. But i. would any Delay Repay be still based on the timetable at the time of booking i.e. my booking confirmation, or any revised timetable that is later introduced? ii. Will the duty to get me to my destination still exist based on my booking confirmation? It does look likely I'd make the last train connection in London onto my destination of Welling even with an hour plus delay, as some leeway - but I can't guarantee.

A later announcement of a strike has no effect on a contract for travel which you have already made.

SWR are still liable to transport you in accordance with the original itinerary, and to provide you with delay compensation and/or alternative transport if they are unable to run the trains as promised.

They may deny this on the day, and accordingly it may be wise to have sufficient money with you to arrange your own alternative transport if they tortiously refuse to do so, but you will ultimately be able to recover these amounts from them.

Unfortunately, SWR seem to have made little attempt to arrange ticket acceptance on alternative GWR routes when strikes have occurred previously (despite them both having a common owner), so I would be surprised if it is any different this time around.

If a GWR service is the only option that prevents you from being stranded overnight, GWR are under an obligation to let you travel on their service F.O.C. if SWR are not providing anything - see Condition 28.2 of the National Rail Conditions of Travel.

 

[Matt Taylor]

Just read the statement from the RMT, if you reading through the normal guff the jist of it I got was over the last 5 months or so there have been many meetings between the union and the company, including a visit to see the trains themselves. During this time the RMT proposed a method of working which was rejected by the company, yet the company have actually yet to make their own plans clear regarding a method of working. If this is true the last few months have been wasted and its bloody naughty of the company to have done this, they need to put their cards on the table and show us what they want.

Not sure if you're reading the same thing as me but I'm reading that meetings have been few and far between and that has been the source of the problems. A quote from the RMT press release in February:

"1. South Western Railway confirm that on the introduction of any new or other modified rolling stock, each passenger train shall operate with a guard with safety critical competencies."

Agreeing to a method of working is the problem, building trains that don't have a 'doors open' button in the guards panels (as I understand it) represents a change that needs to be addressed. Either way, the RMT say SWR promised to have a new method of operation ready for discussion by late May but they have not followed through with it.

I'm by no means the RMT's biggest fan, I think they called it wrong when they went straight to strike and consequently resigned from the union, but that doesn't mean I'm a huge fan of SWR either, I'm trying to stay open minded about the whole situation. Hopefully the dispute will be resolved sooner rather than later.

 

[muz379]

Yeah, even last summer when there were strikes on SWR, the RMT chose to do it in the summer when many people like to the beach e.t.c. They are definitely trying to pick days which cause maximum disruption.

Ignoring the arguments around methods of operation and for or against the strike for a minute .

Is that not the very point of calling industrial action ? To threaten to cause massive disruption on days when it would be most damaging to the company both in terms of revenue and reputation hoping that the company will cave to the demands to avoid that damage . Days with large numbers of leisure travellers are generally days when much of the revenue collected is on walk up fares from people that generally dont commute by train and wont be encouraged to do so if their leisure travel is disrupted .

 

[Goldfish62]

Looking at the press release it doesn't sound to me like it's about who operates the doors. After all, RMT has agreed that on Greater Anglia the guard has no role in door operation except in special circumstances, so why would they refuse the same on SWR? It sounds more like disagreement over exactly what competencies guards on the 701s will hold in future.

 

[maxbarnish]

"A later announcement of a strike has no effect on a contract for travel which you have already made.

SWR are still liable to transport you in accordance with the original itinerary, and to provide you with delay compensation and/or alternative transport if they are unable to run the trains as promised.

They may deny this on the day, and accordingly it may be wise to have sufficient money with you to arrange your own alternative transport if they tortiously refuse to do so, but you will ultimately be able to recover these amounts from them.

Unfortunately, SWR seem to have made little attempt to arrange ticket acceptance on alternative GWR routes when strikes have occurred previously (despite them both having a common owner), so I would be surprised if it is any different this time around.

If a GWR service is the only option that prevents you from being stranded overnight, GWR are under an obligation to let you travel on their service F.O.C. if SWR are not providing anything - see Condition 28.2 of the National Rail Conditions of Travel."

Thank you for your excellent response. About GWR acceptance, this will either be displayed on the website or not and I will check. I have only travelled on SWR strike day once before, and on that occasion they did permit anyone travelling to London from stations between Exeter and Crewkerne to double back to Exeter St Davids and take the GWR. But that's something they decide on a case by case basis probably depending what they can offer re trains on the day. Originally when the strikes started there was no replacement bus at all for Cranbrook, now they have one every 2 hours. In practice, I may use my bus season ticket to get to Exeter if that route is authorised. Now they on one occasion have actually run trains through to Exeter on a strike day but usually not - although Cranbrook is usually skipped. So the bus to Honiton or Exeter is still needed. I will check their publicity nearer the time. At least on this occasion, I am not on the last train of the night, which i often am...This time it's the 17.39 from Cranbrook I am due on, so there's leeway. SWR have in past been pretty good to me actually. As I mentioned on a reply on another thread, they did all the legwork to avoid me being stranded overnight in Axminster when a South Eastern mess up led to a missed last connection of night onto the SWR service that runs through to Exeter. So, I have some confidence in them here.

 

[Bigfoot]

Looking at the press release it doesn't sound to me like it's about who operates the doors. After all, RMT has agreed that on Greater Anglia the guard has no role in door operation except in special circumstances, so why would they refuse the same on SWR? It sounds more like disagreement over exactly what competencies guards on the 701s will hold in future.

The problem is that the rmt has successfully got other new franchise tocs to put in writing that they guarantee a guard on every train, they will expect swr to do the same.

It is the except when disruption occurs etc caveats that they will not agree to, which again other tocs have agreed to having no exceptions.

Don't forget that there's been no real discussion with aslef over train operation nor does the company really have a clue what they want, if they did know they could and should be negotiating with both unions.

 

[SWRtrain_fan]

Looking at the press release it doesn't sound to me like it's about who operates the doors. After all, RMT has agreed that on Greater Anglia the guard has no role in door operation except in special circumstances, so why would they refuse the same on SWR? It sounds more like disagreement over exactly what competencies guards on the 701s will hold in future.

On the SWR website, whenever there was RMT industrial action, it said "The RMT is concerned that the introduction of these new Class 701 trains will reduce the need of guard on SWR trains. However this is simply not true".

 

[ainsworth74]

We're back on topic now but for the avoidance of doubt discusson relating to the OBS role is off-topic. Please ensure going forward that posts remain on topic.

Please also note that we wish to avoid rehashing the same extremely tired pro/anti-DOO arguments on every thread where it could crop up (and some where it can't). So try and avoid that as well please. There are many threads over the last decade or more where its been talked about and little had fundamentally changed despite thousands of posts and hundreds of thousands of words.

 

[Goldfish62]

The problem is that the rmt has successfully got other new franchise tocs to put in writing that they guarantee a guard on every train, they will expect swr to do the same.

It is the except when disruption occurs etc caveats that they will not agree to, which again other tocs have agreed to having no exceptions.

Don't forget that there's been no real discussion with aslef over train operation nor does the company really have a clue what they want, if they did know they could and should be negotiating with both unions.

Thanks. Useful info.

 

[Monty]

On the SWR website, whenever there was RMT industrial action, it said "The RMT is concerned that the introduction of these new Class 701 trains will reduce the need of guard on SWR trains. However this is simply not true".

You need to stop taking everything SWR says as gospel, if the employees did there wouldn't be a strike. Now I am the first person to admit the short comings of the RMT and I haven't been impressed with how they have handled the dispute, the matter is many of us simply do not trust what the company is saying. They have been very opaque and not very forthcoming with how exactly they want to operate these new trains.

 

[embers25]

The RMT may get more public support this time as SWR are comfortably now the most hated TOC in the country (even beating Northern) and given none of the passengers now believe a word SWR say, it is pretty unreasonable to expect the RMT to as SWR hardly have a sparkling record of being customer of staff friendly.

 

[joystick]

If the RMT agree a deal with Swr about what the guards do,wouldn't it have to be approved by ASLEF ? Seeing as Southern drivers got a big pay rise for not having guards .

 

[superalbs]

The RMT may get more public support this time as SWR are comfortably now the most hated TOC in the country (even beating Northern) and given none of the passengers now believe a word SWR say, it is pretty unreasonable to expect the RMT to as SWR hardly have a sparkling record of being customer of staff friendly.

How are we measuring the hate? Any source?