If this goes ahead I cannot see how the RMT can win popular opinion. This is an almost impossible story to put a palatable spin on, from their perspective.
No doubt. This hasn't escaped anybody's notice and many would speculate that this isn't accidental.
This has all the hallmarks of a dispute that'll probably be settled before any strike action takes place
Probably/hopefully. There has been absolutely no discernible benefit from having these 'security guards'. If LM stick to their guns, it'll only support the point of view 'on the Street' that this measure has purely been brought in to stick it to or play the RMT.
I'm convinced the RMT's core purpose is to cause as much disruption and controversy as possible in an ideologically driven mission to undermine the privatised railway. But that is of course just my opinion.
You're entitled to your opinion, but it might be worth considering why LM/Govia, after 9 years of not doing so, with only 9 months remaining of their franchise, have suddenly decided to throw money at this initiative that delivers little real world benefit, yet just so happens to challenge the RMT's LM Company Council stance on agency/casualised workers?
Conductors could use the agency security staff to their advantage to collect more revenue, going through the train with some backup especially late at night makes sense, not only for revenue but as a visible presence to the passengers!
How do you 'use' somebody who has less experience than you, less powers than you, less authority than you, sometimes less physical presence than you, less incentive to be involved than you, next to no training and no understanding of how they can help you, other than promising to step in if you're getting beaten up?
When you're dealing with difficult situations/people, particularly in an enclosed environment like a train, you need to have absolute faith in people working with you so you can predict what they're going to do and thus you can support each other. By bringing two random people in to 'support' you, you just open the window to making any given situation even more unpredictable. There's the potential for them to be more of a liability than a help in volatile situations, just two more people to fall under your duty of care...
I don't see a real issue if staff aren't 'proper' security staff. You surely don't want bouncers who will start chucking people off trains, rather visual deterrents and some back up.
They'd be more welcome if that were the case, as they'd be able to help then! Realistically byelaw enforcement bouncers are more what some services need, though they'd have to work a bit later than the current security if they're to cover most of those trains...
