RMT announcement regarding sewage on tracks

[father_jack]

Do the RMT not realise that putting out this sort of rubbish does their credibility no good at all?

It's got you talking about it though, hasn't it so how rubbish is it ?

 

[DB]

It's got you talking about it though, hasn't it so how rubbish is it ?

Well, it makes them look basically ill-informed as even with basic knowledge it's easy to pick holes in it. Hardly a good look for any organisation.

 

[DarloRich]

Well, it makes them look basically ill-informed as even with basic knowledge it's easy to pick holes in it. Hardly a good look for any organisation.

But does it? It will get the issue some scrutiny and publicity. It isn't on for people to be covered in human waste at work and often have to "clean" up locations before they can start. It is horrible.

 

[py_megapixel]

But does it? It will get the issue some scrutiny and publicity. It isn't on for people to be covered in human waste at work and often have to "clean" up locations before they can start. It is horrible.

The problem is that the cited RMT article is absolutely appalling. It starts off with 3 slightly different phrasings of the same sentence, then goes on to confuse routes with TOCs, some of which are out of date. After this, it claims that there is "no end in sight" for the practice of dumping waste, an assertion which is clearly invalid because all relevant carriages are being either replaced with CET-fitted stock or sent for CET retrofitment in the near future. Finally, it concludes with a quote from their Senior Assistant General Secretary claiming that the government simply doesn't care about this issue, despite the fact they have legislated to require CETs.

I don't believe anyone is claiming that we should just accept the dumping of human waste in the 21st century, and I feel for those who must go out onto the lines every day at risk of being splattered by someone else's sewage. It's absolutely disgusting. But the RMT's article is incredibly one-sided, reads like utter drivel and is full of clear inaccuracies. Yes, this article draws attention to the issue, but to me, more than anything else, it implies that the RMT are completely incompetent

 

[DB]

But does it? It will get the issue some scrutiny and publicity. It isn't on for people to be covered in human waste at work and often have to "clean" up locations before they can start. It is horrible.

Absolutely it's not acceptable to be chucking it on the track - which is why it's being phased out anyway. I'm not clear what a grandstanding article which misrepresents the prevalence of it and ignores the fact that it is well on the way to being eliminated in the fairly near future really achieves.

 

[wildcard]

Whilst the RMT may well have fired off a loose canon complete with inaccuracies and generalisations - I entirely agree with the sentiment expressed . This practice should and could have ended long ago if the will was there. Even if not contractually obliged - if politicians and senior rail figures demanded action loudly and publicly , the TOC's would have complied . If they kicked up a stink (lol ) - passengers would follow suit and complain likewise .

 

[DarloRich]

The problem is that the cited RMT article is absolutely appalling. It starts off with 3 slightly different phrasings of the same sentence, then goes on to confuse routes with TOCs, some of which are out of date. After this, it claims that there is "no end in sight" for the practice of dumping waste, an assertion which is clearly invalid because all relevant carriages are being either replaced with CET-fitted stock or sent for CET retrofitment in the near future. Finally, it concludes with a quote from their Senior Assistant General Secretary claiming that the government simply doesn't care about this issue, despite the fact they have legislated to require CETs.

I don't believe anyone is claiming that we should just accept the dumping of human waste in the 21st century, and I feel for those who must go out onto the lines every day at risk of being splattered by someone else's sewage. It's absolutely disgusting. But the RMT's article is incredibly one-sided, reads like utter drivel and is full of clear inaccuracies. Yes, this article draws attention to the issue, but to me, more than anything else, it implies that the RMT are completely incompetent

Absolutely it's not acceptable to be chucking it on the track - which is why it's being phased out anyway. I'm not clear what a grandstanding article which misrepresents the prevalence of it and ignores the fact that it is well on the way to being eliminated in the fairly near future really achieves.

Are you that naive? It is a press release. It is designed for printing in the paper. It will be. People will talk abut how awful it is and by extension how awful the "fat cats" are because they put profit ahead of workers safety. Job done.

I agree it is poorly drafted ( perhaps willfully) but not one reader in the real world will care.

 

[py_megapixel]

Are you that naive? It is a press release. It is designed for printing in the paper. It will be. People will talk abut how awful it is and by extension how awful the "fat cats" are because they put profit ahead of workers safety. Job done.

Are you expecting that the editors adapting it for the papers are going to be able to correct every single innaccuracy in it?
Quite aside from the fact that many of them will simply republish the press release, that quote from the Senior Assistant General Secretary is probably going to be reused dozens of times, despite being exaggerated and outdated to the point of inaccuracy.

Not one reader in the real world will care about the semantics.

Maybe most readers won't if they just read the paper. But if you tell them the actual facts - that work is being put in to get the tanks fitted as quickly as they sensibly can be while still keeping the service running - they would probably be, quite rightly, annoyed at being given inaccurate information.

 

[DarloRich]

Are you expecting that the editors adapting it for the papers are going to be able to correct every single innaccuracy in it?
Quite aside from the fact that many of them will simply republish the press release, that quote from the Senior Assistant General Secretary is probably going to be reused dozens of times, despite being exaggerated and outdated to the point of inaccuracy.


Maybe most readers won't if they just read the paper. But if you tell them the actual facts - that work is being put in to get the tanks fitted as quickly as they sensibly can be while still keeping the service running - they would probably be, quite rightly, annoyed at being given inaccurate information.

You don't seem to understand the point of all this. It isn't to generate an accurate story. it is to show how awful/greedy/lazy fat cat bosses/Tories are and how terribly they treat people. Once published this will do that. People here get hung up on the semantics. Focus on the bigger picture.

In any event this section is the key one:

Following answers to a number of Parliamentary questions RMT has learnt that eight major train operating companies continue to run trains that dump human waste on tracks and in stations across the rail network despite a pledge for the practice to end by the end of 2019.

 

[DB]

Are you that naive? It is a press release. It is designed for printing in the paper. It will be. People will talk abut how awful it is and by extension how awful the "fat cats" are because they put profit ahead of workers safety. Job done.

I agree it is poorly drafted ( perhaps willfully) but not one reader in the real world will care.

Can you explain what 'job done' actually means in practice? There are already NR rules against it, so no change is needed there. Yes, it's delayed, but work is ongoing and grandstanding won't speed it up. So what is actually going to be achieved by putting out this sort of message?

If it was pushing for regulatory change that would be a different matter, but the change has already gone through so no pushing is needed.

And giving the impression that it is expected to continue indefinitely is simply unacceptable, and probably done because if the actual facts were stated then the media would likely not reprint it at all.

 

[DarloRich]

Can you explain what 'job done' actually means in practice? There are already NR rules against it, so no change is needed there. Yes, it's delayed, but work is ongoing and grandstanding won't speed it up. So what is actually going to be achieved by putting out this sort of message?

If it was pushing for regulatory change that would be a different matter, but the change has already gone through so no pushing is needed.

And giving the impression that it is expected to continue indefinitely is simply unacceptable, and probably done because if the actual facts were stated then the media would likely not reprint it at all.

Yet more over thinking. It is, like all politics, about point scoring. This is about making the Tories and their fat cat mates look awful. That will be "job done" if this is reprinted and people talk about it.

It is about saying: Look, the Tories promised that this disgusting practice would stop. It hasn't and it hasn't happened because they would rather their fat cat mates made more profit at workers expense. They are such awful people. Tackling the issue is secondary to scoring the point in a longer campaign.

(It also says look members we are taking on these awful people for you. Keep the subs coming in)

This really shouldn't need explaining

PS: Also more pushing IS needed because dropping pooh on people is not on. The rail industry has had long enough to sort this out and should be held to account for not doing so.

 

[py_megapixel]

You don't seem to understand the point of all this. It isn't to generate an accurate story. it is to show how awful/greedy/lazy fat cat bosses/Tories are and how terribly they treat people. Once published this will do that. People here get hung up on the semantics. Focus on the bigger picture.

The problem is you seem to be claiming that it's perfectly fine for one to provide innaccurate information to the public, if one believes the overall aim to be positive. In other words, it is acceptable to mislead people into agreeing with you. I don't disagree about how terribly people are treated under the current system; I disagree morally with the idea that this makes it acceptable to lie to people.

People here get hung up on the semantics. Focus on the bigger picture.

What do you mean? The "bigger picture" is that CET mods are done on most units, and will be done on all the remaining ones before very long. As for those units where the mods aren't planned, replacements are already under construction. Simple.

Following answers to a number of Parliamentary questions RMT has learnt that eight major train operating companies continue to run trains that dump human waste on tracks and in stations across the rail network despite a pledge for the practice to end by the end of 2019.

The problem is that those eight train operating companies only operate a few non-CET trains each!

 

[Trackman]

Anyone know about old charter stock?

 

[james_the_xv]

So the RMT are putting out a deliberately misleading press release... shocker.

They know full well all non-compliant stock is either in the process of being replaced and will be gone very soon or going into overhaul very soon. Also making it sound like every single train those companies run is dumping raw sewage onto the tracks which is clearly not the case.

By the end of this year we'll be looking at a very few number of sets that are non-compliant which will be replaced very soon after that, so this is essentially a non-story that the RMT are trying to buff up because no one has given them any attention recently.

 

[DB]

The problem is that those eight train operating companies only operate a few non-CET trains each!

Two of them now operate none!

And I agree with your general point. It isnever acceptable to distort the facts to make a point.

 

[DB]

PS: Also more pushing IS needed because dropping pooh on people is not on. The rail industry has had long enough to sort this out and should be held to account for not doing so.

Can you explain what you actually expect them to do about it and how 'holding them to account' is going to make any difference to anything?

 

[61653 HTAFC]

It's ironic that a press release addressing the issue of toilets emptying onto tracks contains so much quality fertiliser... but then it says a lot about the state of the media that without the hyperbole this press release would have been roundly ignored.

 

[kieron]

What do you mean? The "bigger picture" is that CET mods are done on most units, and will be done on all the remaining ones before very long. As for those units where the mods aren't planned, replacements are already under construction. Simple.

Replacements are under construction for some of the trains, but (in some cases) a lack of trained staff means that no-one can say when they'll actually enter service. It would be good to know how the RMT are working to ensure that this is sooner rather than later.

 

[james_the_xv]

It's ironic that a press release addressing the issue of toilets emptying onto tracks contains so much quality fertiliser... but then it says a lot about the state of the media that without the hyperbole this press release would have been roundly ignored.

Not so much the state of the media - more the fact the story wouldn't have been worth printing in its truthful form especially as the only other solution is to withdraw the non-compliant stock immediately which for some operators would mean a reduction in services which the RMT would also have a problem with...

 

[DarloRich]

The problem is you seem to be claiming that it's perfectly fine for one to provide innaccurate information to the public, if one believes the overall aim to be positive. In other words, it is acceptable to mislead people into agreeing with you. I don't disagree about how terribly people are treated under the current system; I disagree morally with the idea that this makes it acceptable to lie to people.

I think you live in a different world to me. Many posters here seem to. I hope you are able to maintain such fine principles when life starts to kick you a few times.

How many points is some trains drop human waste on the track but they will be gone soon, if later than mandated, going to score?

What do you mean? The "bigger picture" is that CET mods are done on most units, and will be done on all the remaining ones before very long. As for those units where the mods aren't planned, replacements are already under construction. Simple.

Really? It is politics. Pure and simple. Try to look beyond trains and look at the motivations behind statements and the stances taken by the organisations involved.

The problem is that those eight train operating companies only operate a few non-CET trains each!

For me one train is too many. What number do you settle on?

Can you explain what you actually expect them to do about it and how 'holding them to account' is going to make any difference to anything?

The industry has had long enough to sort this out. There should be stiff fines for companies who have failed to meet the deadline. There wont be of course.............................

I could ask why you think this kind of behaviour is acceptable and why you are happy to give a free pass to such disgusting practices

Replacements are under construction for some of the trains, but a lack of trained staff means that no-one can say when they'll actually enter service. It would be good to know how the RMT are working to ensure that this is sooner rather than later.

Sigh. Why is it the job of the RMT to do that?

Not so much the state of the media - more the fact the story wouldn't have been worth printing in its truthful form especially as the only other solution is to withdraw the non-compliant stock immediately which for some operators would mean a reduction in services which the RMT would also have a problem with...

another poster who doesn't understand the world around them! I wonder why people are not criticsing the TOC's for failing to meet a very clear deadline?

 

[kieron]

Not so much the state of the media - more the fact the story wouldn't have been worth printing in its truthful form especially as the only other solution is to withdraw the non-compliant stock immediately which for some operators would mean a reduction in services which the RMT would also have a problem with...

Or lock the toilets out of use. The article doesn't ask for anything like that, though.

 

[DarloRich]

Or lock the toilets out of use. The article doesn't ask for anything like that, though.

why should it? That isn't the job of the union. Surely that is obvious.

 

[Andyh82]

Can you explain what 'job done' actually means in practice? There are already NR rules against it, so no change is needed there. Yes, it's delayed, but work is ongoing and grandstanding won't speed it up. So what is actually going to be achieved by putting out this sort of message?

If it was pushing for regulatory change that would be a different matter, but the change has already gone through so no pushing is needed.

And giving the impression that it is expected to continue indefinitely is simply unacceptable, and probably done because if the actual facts were stated then the media would likely not reprint it at all.

It's just the RMT keeping up the momentum against rail bosses/tories/privatisation/foreign owners, with the current operating situation they've lost most of the cards they hold, so have had to turn to something else

 

[DarloRich]

It's just the RMT keeping up the momentum against rail bosses/tories/privatisation/foreign owners, with the current operating situation they've lost most of the cards they hold, so have had to turn to something else

at least one person gets it!

 

[james_the_xv]

another poster who doesn't understand the world around them!

another poster who thinks differing viewpoint = must not understand life. You must be fun at parties.

I wonder why people are not criticsing the TOC's for failing to meet a very clear deadline?

I'm pretty sure that's already been done enough - TOCs have ordered new stock and planned refurbishment/withdrawal for non compliant stock. Dumping raw sewage on the tracks is going away soon my point is that the RMT are trying to make a big deal out of this when there is now very few stock non compliant. The exaggeration in the statement doesn't help them either in my opinion.

Or lock the toilets out of use. The article doesn't ask for anything like that, though.

Fair point - but on long distance trains is it not required to have toilet facilities?

 

[eldomtom2]

I am surprised the RMT haven't made more of an issue about it frankly.

Working conditions generally rank lower than things like pay when it comes to unions, especially if the issue is localised.

 

[DB]

The industry has had long enough to sort this out. There should be stiff fines for companies who have failed to meet the deadline. There wont be of course.............................

I could ask why you think this kind of behaviour is acceptable and why you are happy to give a free pass to such disgusting practices

You seem to be missing the point that in a lot of these cases it's down to the DfT's cock-ups over franchising - i.e. the change of franchise was too close to the deadline for it to be possible by then, and they did nothing to come to an agreement with the previous operator to modify existing stock or order new. How do you expect new franchisees such as EMR to deal with this? Cancel a load of services? RMT wouldn't like that either.

But of course, no blame can be placed at the door of the DfT because the RMT has a very simplistic view that everything 'private' is bad whereas everything 'public' is good, whereas in reality it's nowhere near that well-defined.

And for those who have been franchise holders long enough to have been able to do it, the delays are in most cases not their fault, but in any case how do you think fining them would help? They are currently under management contracts, so the government would be fining itself, and even under normal circumstances some of them (e.g. Northern) make a net loss so receive a subsidy, so similar would apply - and Northern is also now run by the DfT (indirectly), so another reason why it would be fining itself.

As for the accusation that I think it is acceptable to dump it on the track, I don't as I have said several times, but you seem determined to ignore this. Unfortunately you do seem to be one of those millitant types keen to shout 'something must be done' without actually having any ideas about what. Fining companies would not stop it - the only options are either a) accept that it's bad but that it will continue for a little longer or b) cancel a load of services. Nobody seems to be able to suggest any other option.

 

[py_megapixel]

Going away from the actual article for a moment...
This situation is, more than anything, the fault of the franchising system, and how badly the DfT have handled it.

Say the deadline for a particular modification (as it was) was 31st December 2019, and a TOC's franchise ends in June 2019. What incentive do they have to pay for the units to have that modification when, for all they know, they'll be long gone by the time it becomes required? This then leaves their successor with less than a year to get a whole fleet up to scratch.

 

[43096]

Sigh. Why is it the job of the RMT to do that?

Because the unions are the ones screaming about having multiple people in the cab which prevents training on the replacements.

 

[kieron]

Sigh. Why is it the job of the RMT to do that?

I apologise if sensible discussion bores you.

The RMT represent staff who will be expected to operate some of the replacement trains. They will need to be trained to do so first, and any training programme at the current time will need union input to ensure that the needs of the staff involved is taken fully into account.

I don't know where "not my job" comes into it, though. The use of trains with non-CET toilets is a problem for their members, as the article makes clear. What the union does about that problem is for them to decide.