Gatwick Express Industrial Relations

[D1009]

To me it looks like a failure of industrial relations if disagreement results in passengers being denied access to a train for which they have paid their fares, particularly one to an airport.

 

[radamfi]

Erm...this is the whole discussion on this thread :-?

So far on this thread it has been stated that two 12 car trains ran empty on Saturday morning but nothing about what happened afterwards. 12 car trains were supposed to run "officially" from today. Did that happen?

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Who decided upon the length of the trains - Govia, DfT or a combination of both of them?

 

[JonathanH]

This is the ASLEF that are completely opposed to further DOO despite patently having agreements in place for its use with many TOCs.

Does the current agreement explicitly state that DOO is only to be allowed on trains up to 10 car length? Can we have any link to that agreement that shows this?

GTR informed ASLEF on the 6th April that they would be running 12 car Class 387s from 9th April and... "We (GTR) will require all drivers who have been trained on using the new Class 387s to undertake these services when instructed to do so.'

ASLEF, as is there right, have said they will ballot their driver members at Southern and Gatwick Express over this. Why ballot if there's already an agreement to not run more than 10 car DOO? No need for industrial action, just refuse to take the trains out.

It appears that one driver has taken it upon himself to start the industrial action ahead of the ballot.

ASLEF are saying that they are balloting members because they were not consulted about the 12 car introduction. They've made no statement that the operator are breaching an agreement. I wonder why?

It is somewhat crazy that this is coming up right when the trains are scheduled to be introduced into service. If a 10-car 442 service is running for sufficient capacity (eg for the peak-time Brighton extensions) then it should be clear right back to the day that the 387/2 order was announced that 12-car 387/2 running would have to happen and if Gatwick Express is running DOO(P) with 442s then the 12-car trains would have to also. This has been 'in the public domain' since at least August 2014, if not May.

The same applies to the use of 12-car 700s from Littlehampton and Horsham. It has surely been obvious from even longer ago that Southern drivers would have to work 12-car DOO(P) from Horsham on the switch of current Southern London Bridge terminators onto routes through Thameslink.

 

[sarahj]

There is a lot more to this story than is being told in the media. I will not go into the facts and what went on an open website, but lets just say a driver had his resolve, and all the resolve of all the other drivers, tested.
The time of the train, 5.30am, might give some idea of things as well.

 

[Bald Rick]

If, and I stress if, there is not an agreement that specifies the length of trains that DOO applies to, then it is a dangerous game for ASLEF to play, but surely they would know that.

The usual lever for the rail unions with industrial action is the revenue loss the operator will incur during strike action. But GTR is a cost only contract, with DfT bearing the revenue risk. So it would be up to DfT to say how prepared they were to bear that loss.

As it happens we know the DfTs attitude to this matter, as was widely reported on this forum and elsewhere.

As an aside, would all drivers be balloted, or just those that operate non DOO services?

This could all get very interesting!

 

[bnm]

There is a lot more to this story than is being told in the media. I will not go into the facts and what went on an open website, but lets just say a driver had his resolve, and all the resolve of all the other drivers, tested.
The time of the train, 5.30am, might give some idea of things as well.

All that does is contribute to the rumour mill.

I, as a mere member of the public, can only base my opinion on what is reported and what the operator and union have stated publicly.

Dropping in useless titbits about 'resolve' and the time of day does nothing to either enlighten me or persuade me that my opinion needs modifying.

 

[LowLevel]

It is somewhat crazy that this is coming up right when the trains are scheduled to be introduced into service. If a 10-car 442 service is running for sufficient capacity (eg for the peak-time Brighton extensions) then it should be clear right back to the day that the 387/2 order was announced that 12-car 387/2 running would have to happen and if Gatwick Express is running DOO(P) with 442s then the 12-car trains would have to also. This has been 'in the public domain' since at least August 2014, if not May.

The same applies to the use of 12-car 700s from Littlehampton and Horsham. It has surely been obvious from even longer ago that Southern drivers would have to work 12-car DOO(P) from Horsham on the switch of current Southern London Bridge terminators onto routes through Thameslink.

There's no *have to* about anything, it's entirely a choice. The SWT version of the train is guard operated.

It's become more and more obvious that the staff really don't want to do this and would appear to have good reason. A compromise may well be not to spread it further and to not roll it back where it exists but seriously, events over the last few years have focussed minds on this issue. Whether from the perspective of legal culpability, to being in sole charge of the safety of up to 1000 people on a train, to what happens if something happens to you and who can help you.

It isn't just about Gatwick Express. GTR wants to pretend to be different companies and then again one company depending on the circumstances as it suits it and fairly imminently want to be rid of guards from most Southern services. It would appear the drivers have a sincere desire not to allow this to happen and this is the obvious result.

I'll stick with the SWT equivalent method of working of a proper guard on every train, publicising the fact and still turning in the biggest profit.

 

[HarleyDavidson]

Having a guard is the safest option. ALWAYS.

 

[headshot119]

Having a guard is the safest option. ALWAYS.

Amen!

 

[Robertj21a]

How many suitable drivers might there be who are NOT in ASLEF ? (very few I expect, but there must be some).

 

[ComUtoR]

It isn't just about Gatwick Express. GTR wants to pretend to be different companies and then again one company depending on the circumstances as it suits it and fairly imminently want to be rid of guards from most Southern services. It would appear the drivers have a sincere desire not to allow this to happen and this is the obvious result.

The whole GTR "branding" separation is ludicrous. That aside; the problem is that to treat all Drivers equally across all brands and to bring the company together as a single entity you need to go through harmonisation. I truly don't believe that harmonisation will ever happen. T&C's are so far apart now that its a total nightmare.

Where Driver conditions are separate is there a possibility that GTR can simply switch the routes to the other brand ? Could the Gatwick express route/traction be moved over to the Drivers who are capable of 12-Car DOO ? The same with Southern routes that have Guards. Can they be driven by DOO Drivers or does it work like our DOO where we have a "DOO area" ?

Cheers in advance.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

How many suitable drivers might there be who are NOT in ASLEF ? (very few I expect, but there must be some).

The terms are the same for all Drivers. T&C's aren't limited to being in ASLEF. If your terms state you cannot drive 12-Car DOO then that applies to every Driver.

 

[driver_m]

All that does is contribute to the rumour mill.

I, as a mere member of the public, can only base my opinion on what is reported and what the operator and union have stated publicly.

Dropping in useless titbits about 'resolve' and the time of day does nothing to either enlighten me or persuade me that my opinion needs modifying.

I've just read this thread in one go and its quite blatantly clear that you have it in for the driver. So of course we are going to circle the wagons, so to speak. Because its quite clear you are not prepared to listen. There is no agreement in place to drive 12 car DOO. ASLEF's postion is now no more extension of DOO, Simple.

If I was to drive two sprinter units DOO hypothetically and was told there is no agreement to drive 3 units in passenger service, then I would not drive it in passenger service if 3 turned up.
It is no different to a different traction turning up that i didnt sign. I would not drive it. Not for 12hrs, not for any bribe. That is not unilateral action, that is safety advice from our union.

Have a look if the train ran as a class 1,2 or 5(ECS) That would make it clear as to how the train was ran

 

[Chrisgr31]

On the 8th April ASLEF released this statement http://www.aslef.org.uk/information/144171/southern_and_gatwick_express_ballot/ so its probably not a surprise to find GTR having a 12 carriage train onan early service to see what happens.

As a passenger that commutes on Southern trains I can't say I am pleased to see that ASLEF are balloting for industrial action, however the reality is that having a guard and a driver makes for a far better situation when a service goes pearshaped.

If there is a technical issue with the train the driver can work on fixing it, speaking to the depot etc whilst the guard keeps the passengers informed. The guard and driver can also share information, it may be the guard has operated a service that had a similar issue and is able to offer the driver experience etc.

Not only that but if the worst was to happen and the train is involved in a collision the driver is at most risk, so having another member of staff has to be an advantage.

DOO might have been in operation for years but I understand there have been a number of cases recently where action has been taken against staff following incidents on train departures. I dont know if this is an increase in these threats and prosecutions but wouldnt be surprised if there is more danger of legal action.

Therefore in my view it is only natural for ASLEF to be concerned about more DOO and they might even regret what DOO there is.

I am inclined to agree with ASLEF on this and I want guards and staff in general. I asupect many other passengers do too.

 

[Bald Rick]

There is no agreement in place to drive 12 car DOO. ASLEF's postion is now no more extension of DOO, Simple.

Genuine question, because it is crucial to the discussion, and no one on the forum seems to know. I certainly don't.

Does the DOO agreement in place, or any other part of the Ts and Cs of the drivers concerned, specify the length of trains that can be operated as DOO?

If so, then ASLEF have a valid point.

If not, their position on this specific matter is not relevant.

 

[bb21]

So according to the ASLEF statement, GTR gave people three days' notice and potentially without prior agreement?! hock:

Talk of taking the mickey. :roll:

 

[sarahj]

Genuine question, because it is crucial to the discussion, and no one on the forum seems to know. I certainly don't.

Does the DOO agreement in place, or any other part of the Ts and Cs of the drivers concerned, specify the length of trains that can be operated as DOO?

If so, then ASLEF have a valid point.

If not, their position on this specific matter is not relevant.

Yes is the simple answer. Any 12 car train (or train over 10 cars) must have a guard. This is with Southern and Gatwick express.

FCC as was, agreed at the time with their drivers to allow 12 cars DOO on the main line only stopping at stations with dispatch. (Haywards Heath, Three Bridges,Gatwick, East Croydon etc). The limits to this have been pushed to the extreme. A line has been drawn.

 

[Bald Rick]

Yes is the simple answer. Any 12 car train (or train over 10 cars) must have a guard. This is with Southern and Gatwick express.

FCC as was, agreed at the time with their drivers to allow 12 cars DOO on the main line only stopping at stations with dispatch. (Haywards Heath, Three Bridges,Gatwick, East Croydon etc). The limits to this have been pushed to the extreme. A line has been drawn.

Thanks Sarah. Looks like fun times ahead then.

(Although I'm still not clear if it is specifically set out in an agreement, or is custom and practice based on previous working and the risk assessments that supported it.)

The issue with FCC might be slightly different, in that at that time they only ran DOO services, and maximum 8 car, so the issue was about extending the trains as a job lot, not just DOO.

 

[sarahj]

Happy to repeat that ad infinitum. I won't change my opinion based on the posts of fellow forum members unless they cite verifiable information.

I go by what's reported and in the public domain. I await clarification on the DOO agreement between Southern/GatEx and its drivers. If that explicitly refers to train length then I can understand the driver's actions on Saturday and my opinion will be modified.

See my e-mail 11 mins before yours. It does refer to train lengths. Max 10 cars DOO. Anything more, a guard is needed.

And it IS set out in an agreement.

 

[bnm]

And it IS set out in an agreement.

Putting something in bold doesn't make it so. How about a copy of the agreement. You can redact anything not pertinent.

Your posts after all are "not official policy..."

 

[Bald Rick]

See my e-mail 11 mins before yours. It does refer to train lengths. Max 10 cars DOO. Anything more, a guard is needed.

And it IS set out in an agreement.

Thanks again, absolutely clear now.

 

[driver_m]

Genuine question, because it is crucial to the discussion, and no one on the forum seems to know. I certainly don't.

Does the DOO agreement in place, or any other part of the Ts and Cs of the drivers concerned, specify the length of trains that can be operated as DOO?

If so, then ASLEF have a valid point.

If not, their position on this specific matter is not relevant.

Yes. Think about what you're saying. I drive 390's. Do you seriously think i could just go out and drive one that been 9 cars for years, and then suddenly start driving 11 car versions without any basic consideration of what might be different? Such as the fact I can't take one along North Wales, cant go in a number of platforms etc. The principle is the exact same with DOO. An agreement is in place with a train of a set length. You can't just lengthen a train with 3 days notice or whatever it is that has happened down there.

I'll apologise for the tone of my reply, I'm a tad annoyed at this bnm and his snotty replies to people. Not fair to have a go at you. Sorry.

 

[Bald Rick]

Putting something in bold doesn't make it so. How about a copy of the agreement. You can redact anything not pertinent.

I think it is fair to say that if a forum member who is one of the people directly involved says there is an agreement, then we should trust them. I certainly do.

Besides, I'm not sure forum members should post actual copy of agreements made between companies and their trades unions.

 

[sarahj]

Of course, to my hand I have full copies of the drivers agreements with Southern and Gatwick express, and if I had would be willing to post on an open forum.

If you don't want to believe me, don't. Lets just say when I go to work each day I work along drivers who work Brighton main line and have been informed that there is a written agreement that anything over 10 cars must have a guard. I have not seen in person this document, why would I, I'm not a driver. However, in the years I have worked there, whenever anything is over 10 cars, a guard has been provided and strike action is being discussed over an end to this agreement. When a company wishes to change an agreement, discussions happen with the union. If no agreement is made, sometimes hands are forced. then disputes happen.

 

[Bald Rick]

Yes. Think about what you're saying. I drive 390's. Do you seriously think i could just go out and drive one that been 9 cars for years, and then suddenly start driving 11 car versions without any basic consideration of what might be different? Such as the fact I can't take one along North Wales, cant go in a number of platforms etc. The principle is the exact same with DOO. An agreement is in place with a train of a set length. You can't just lengthen a train with 3 days notice or whatever it is that has happened down there.

That I understand. But there is a difference between changing the length of train, and all that it entails, compared to the conversion of a train of existing length to DOO on a route that already has exactly the same trains (indeed the very same units), of exactly the same length operating in DOO.

And there is at least one train operator where length of train is not specified in their DOO agreement, which given they have been DOO since late BR days, must have been a BR DOO agreement, which one assumes was standardised given national bargaining.

Hence my questions. But they have been answered. So I'm out!

Ps no offence taken.

 

[driver_m]

That I understand. But there is a difference between a length of train, and all that it entails, compared to the conversion of a train of existing length to DOO on a route that already has exactly the same trains (indeed the very same units), of exactly the same length operating in DOO.

And there is at least one train operator where length of train is not specified in their DOO agreement, which given they have been DOO since late BR days, must have been a BR DOO agreement, which one assumes was standardised given national bargaining.

Hence my questions. But they have been answered. So I'm out!

Ps no offence taken.

Thanks for not doing, let anger get the better of me. Its a difficult one now with DOO as the view has now massively changed since the Merseyrail stuff issues (gone and going through court). I'll leave it here too

 

[Bishopstone]

In respect of the implications of a lengthy dispute, how many 3x387 diagrams were ultimately intended?

For example, were the off-peak Brighton extensions due to be 8 or 12 car?

Were the peak Brighton extensions (calling at Haywards Heath etc) all down to be 3x387, or a mix of 8 and 12 cars?

 

[Carlisle]

I'll stick with the SWT equivalent method of working of a proper guard on every train, publicising the fact and still turning in the biggest profit.

Yes but aren't you mostly referring to a previous time period , SWT as we know it hasn't long left to run anyway , TFL will take over some services which may or may not become DOO at some point ,and a future operator will decide on the rest depending I suppose mainly on what's agreed between them and the DFT for the next franchise

 

[philthetube]

It seems strange that no one has mentioned safety, the longer the train, the more sets of doors the driver has to watch, the more monitors he/she has to view and the bigger potential for mistakes/errors/accidents.

Please can the only comments about drivers being well paid and should therefore not make mistakes come from people who have never made a mistake while at work.

 

[fabs]

For the record I'm generally anti DOO. I do think both unions would better serve their members if they adjusted their language but that's a personal opinion.
Genuine question though. Was 12 car DOO discussed by CC in August 2015 as requested by the company? (Can't find the Aug minutes)
http://www.aslefsouthern.org.uk/docs/dfc_mins/2015/150715.pdf

For info here are Terms and Conditions for Drivers. Page 29 for DOO. I can find references to train car length but not specifically restricting to 10 car on DOO (happy to edit if there is a superseding document or I've missed something).


http://www.aslefsouthern.org.uk/docs/GX_cos/GX Conditions of Service Oct 2012.pdf