Right let's put the record straight. The RMT yesterday put out another press release where they referred to the franchise de-staffing stations and the planned role out of DOO being the franchise putting profit before safety. Those are both blatant lies as, while the option of de-staffing stations was looked at during the consultation stage (by the request of Peter Wilkinson), the option was not only dismissed but there was a requirement added in to provide staff at unstaffed stations on the Northern Connect network when it starts in December 2019. On the other hand the planned role out of DOO/DCO is a DfT decision, so it would be happening even if the railways were nationalised and may happen even quicker if the railway as nationalised. Certain people are spending considerable amounts of time posting the RMT's lies over social media, I responded to 5 tweets yesterday about so called de-staffing of stations, asking do they have any evidence of that other than the option in the 2015 franchise consultation, which was dismissed and guess what 3 people didn't respond, 1 gave an abusive response about me not understanding what the dispute is about and then blocked me before I could reply to that and another just blocked me.
Just so you are aware putting "lets put the record straight" does not make your post any more factual or authoritative . In fact if anything it just demonstrates to me that you have weak response to the substantive points I put to you , many of which you have not even bothered to respond to . great start there , not .
Anyway , im not particularly interested in what you spent your saturday afternoon doing , but am glad you found fulfilling activities to occupy the time . Why are you now going on about what the RMT is saying about destaffing stations , it is not remotely relevant to the story about the passengers kicked off the train because the guard could no longer work it forward . In effect all I was interested in was your claim that passengers did not beleive what the RMT was saying about the safety argument for a guranteed guard on every train . But instead of saying it is not necessary these passengers supposedly blamed the TOC for putting profit first and not allowing a train to run without one . As I said that does not hold up to even the most cursory analysis , what you are saying is quite simply illogical .
I get that you don't like what I posted and you want to believe the fantasy scenario that the passengers are largely backing the RMT and you know it's a ridiculous question to ask if I interviewed every single passenger. However, I can assure you despite many people complaining about being thrown off the train and going to being late for work because of it that not one person said they wouldn't have wanted to stay on the train if they had been allowed to stay on or started arguing that it was the right thing for passengers to be thrown off due to the absence of the guard. I don't know what alternative travel arrangements you are suggesting - the only person who got alternative travel arrangements was the guard, if you think taxis are in plentiful supply in the morning peak in a rural village think again, they are pretty much all being used to transport schoolkids from isolated communities and disabled schoolkids who have to go to special schools. Passengers number one priority is almost always getting to where they want to be at the scheduled time not having a guard on the train.
And I get that you dont like the RMT . But come on , even you must see that you are clutching at straws here . Not once in my comment did I mention any supposed public support for the RMT . In fact I considered at length the idea that many passengers might have accepted your view that the RMT are lying . But even then , as i say above logically what they then went on to say according to your version of events does not correspond with them having listened at any length to any detail about the dispute and decided the RMT is lying .
So just to confirm , you did not interview any of the passengers , or witness any of this event in question . So really all you are doing here is giving your opinion on the basis of hearsay and your own dislike of the RMT and assumption that everyone else holds the same view .
As for alternative transport . I dont know how the passengers completed their journey, I just as yourself was not there . But It seems reasonable to suggest that perhaps some of them returned home for their cars or rung partners/friends for a lift . Not that it is really that important to the detail of the story anyhow .
Given the RMT have repeated the same old "evil German firm putting profit before safety by axing guards" story for each of the 32 strike days I'm pretty sure the passengers who've listened to or read the news know exactly what the RMT claim is the main reason behind the dispute. OK there's some who don't take notice of the news and there's some who know better than to believe the RMT but for those who listened the RMT's misinformation and lies are backfiring.
Again , just your own view with no actual evidence to back it up . I repeat again in case it is not entirely clear you are putting words into the mouths of passengers you have never met and just heard a story about . We could all do that . But its not entirely helpful . I know you will probably come back and say I dont like it when people say that about the RMT . Perhaps not , however as I already alluded to , I am not saying that there is universal passenger support for the position of the RMT or action . As I say its more likely that the vast majority of passengers actually have paid little if any interest in the detail of the dispute and see ongoing industrial action as a common problem with the railways in this country .
