RMT settle dispute with Greater Anglia

[AlterEgo]

Because it takes far less time (and money) to train an OBS than a guard, so when you fire an OBS you aren't loosing months of training but weeks, and you can source the replacement far quicker.

And because the most militant union on the railway refuses to represent them.

 

[Dave1987]

And because the most militant union on the railway refuses to represent them.

I wasn’t aware that the RMT was obliged to represent the OBS.

 

[AlterEgo]

I wasn’t aware that the RMT was obliged to represent the OBS.

They’re not. I was simply giving a reason why they may be easier to replace than guards.

 

[Robertj21a]

A change in attitude perhaps brought about by the grudging realisation that 'project DOO' hasn't worked, we shall see. As I've already made very clear, your opinion differs greatly from mine (and that of most staff, including some who do the job and know a lot more about it than either of us), and I'm not interested in pointless games of pingpong with you.

No 'pingpong' from me, merely stating facts. By the way, just because my opinion 'differs greatly' I'm still allowed to make my own comments on an open forum (I know that doesn't always go down well with you). I'm not really concerned about what the staff think of the OBS role, I'm looking at what the general travelling public are seeing with their own eyes - after all, they are the ones paying for the overall service provided by Southern. Clearly, they appreciate the customer-focused OBS staff.
None of that should be interpreted as any criticism of any existing 'traditional' rail staff, most of whom have always done a good job.

 

[BestWestern]

No 'pingpong' from me, merely stating facts. By the way, just because my opinion 'differs greatly' I'm still allowed to make my own comments on an open forum (I know that doesn't always go down well with you). I'm not really concerned about what the staff think of the OBS role, I'm looking at what the general travelling public are seeing with their own eyes - after all, they are the ones paying for the overall service provided by Southern. Clearly, they appreciate the customer-focused OBS staff.
None of that should be interpreted as any criticism of any existing 'traditional' rail staff, most of whom have always done a good job.

I can only find your remarks rather puzzling; never have I taken issue with anybody's entitlement to have their view, but merely responded with debate as per the purpose of a forum. Rather it is you who appears to feel the need to go for the personal attack method, and yet you now seek to imply that others have a problem with debate. All rather odd! Not to mention tiresome...

 

[CN75]

No 'pingpong' from me, merely stating facts. By the way, just because my opinion 'differs greatly' I'm still allowed to make my own comments on an open forum (I know that doesn't always go down well with you). I'm not really concerned about what the staff think of the OBS role, I'm looking at what the general travelling public are seeing with their own eyes - after all, they are the ones paying for the overall service provided by Southern. Clearly, they appreciate the customer-focused OBS staff.
None of that should be interpreted as any criticism of any existing 'traditional' rail staff, most of whom have always done a good job.

You would probably find there are several groups of staff working at Southern as OBS. It isn’t difficult to imagine and the same often goes for any long running trade union dispute that involves strikes.

One group who are being paid £35k doing a customer service job on gold plated railway industry terms and conditions with free travel etc, new in and full of gratitude and enthusiasm for their jobs.

Another group could be ex guards who actually prefer being OBS, or have got over the issue and made the best of it positively and have completed the so called ‘change curve’.

And there is probably another group, the ex guards OBS who are still striking and are exceedingly bitter about it all after two years of old school railway fighting which has failed to produce anything. Solid RMT members. Unlikely to be very enthusiastic doing their jobs and as such not seen as assets by the public or by Southern.

 

[Carlisle]

A question for you; could you provide a list of examples where the widespread, substantial deskilling of a job and significant transfer of responsibility to other staff has assisted in the secure long term future of the role without disadvantage to the employees? I'll forward it to the unions and then we can stop having all these inconvenient strikes over our silly paranoid conspiracy theories. Nice one, cheers.

Station staff ( I know some personally) went through almost identical restructuring procedures (ok you call it deskilling) not too long before or during privitisation.

Alongside the introduction of new technology they lost all PTS certificates local shunting and other related passenger,freight and parcels work, hand signalling, trackside cleaning etc.

Whether the RMT at the time were just far superioor negotiators of change or merely concluded they lacked the ability to cause immediate major disruption and opportunity to run highly dubious public fear campaigns, i genuinely don’t know.

However I do know that those that haven’t left or retired are still on the railway today earning what they themselves admit is a reasonable wage

 

[Robertj21a]

I can only find your remarks rather puzzling; never have I taken issue with anybody's entitlement to have their view, but merely responded with debate as per the purpose of a forum. Rather it is you who appears to feel the need to go for the personal attack method, and yet you now seek to imply that others have a problem with debate. All rather odd! Not to mention tiresome...

...sigh.....

Sorry if I'm now 'tiresome' - I get the distinct impression that you don't really appreciate dealing with anybody who has differing views to yourself. Sorry about that....
You, rightly, state that we have differing views and you have no wish to Pingpong [agreed] and I have merely highlighted that I am still free to make my own comments. No more and nothing else intended.

Perhaps we can now move on

 

[The Ham]

You’ve certainly indicated your own position virtually every other post of yours is either: attacking a union; telling staff they should pick up litter, even when it’s not their job;

I would just like to suggest that part of anyone's job is to try and improve the customers' view of the company that they work for. As such doing things that are "not their job" which clearly do so (such as cleaning up litter) does this.

Clearly doing something that is unsafe is a totally different matter, however clearing away a bit of litter (which also means that others are less prone to leave their litter) can mean that passengers feel that they are traveling on a clean train and so benefits the company.

I always find it odd, especially in such a public facing role, that people are willing to roll out the 'it's not my job" to not do something because it is seen as below them.

However maybethat's just because I've only worked in small companies where the directors/partners would do what was needed, whatever that was from photocopying or binding upwards, to ensure that deadlines where met whilst still providing a good quality product.

 

[BestWestern]

I would just like to suggest that part of anyone's job is to try and improve the customers' view of the company that they work for. As such doing things that are "not their job" which clearly do so (such as cleaning up litter) does this.

Clearly doing something that is unsafe is a totally different matter, however clearing away a bit of litter (which also means that others are less prone to leave their litter) can mean that passengers feel that they are traveling on a clean train and so benefits the company.

I always find it odd, especially in such a public facing role, that people are willing to roll out the 'it's not my job" to not do something because it is seen as below them.

However maybethat's just because I've only worked in small companies where the directors/partners would do what was needed, whatever that was from photocopying or binding upwards, to ensure that deadlines where met whilst still providing a good quality product.

It's a couple of things I think. There are certainly those who won't do something simply because it isn't written down anywhere that they have to. That isn't just on the railway of course, and not just litter! However, to be more rail-specific, some TOCs can provide appalling examples of corporate laziness at times. Ask a Guard how often they've had to start a service with a train that's swimming in rubbish, because there are insufficient cleaning staff being made available to make the stock presentable. Or with toilets unserviceable because there was nobody to refill the water at the last turnaround point, or the CET tanks weren't emptied on the depot. Or with defects that haven't been rectified due to lack of time/staff/parts/enthusiasm on a depot. How often do we hear about BR-era stock with knackered aircon on here, slowly roasting staff and passengers alike every summer for the last 20 years? Why were SWT able to operate a fleet of Class 158s with working a/c, yet every other operator of the type still can't, for example? Sometimes companies ignore things, because they don't want to expend the time, effort or money to do something properly. There is, at times, a very valid argument that if people continue to go above and beyond to pick up the pieces, to do a job that the company should be taking responsibility for getting done, it only serves to perpetuate the lack of effort in resolving things. No doubt the same issue occurs across the board, not just within the railway!

 

[Carlisle]

It's a couple of things I think. There are certainly those who won't do something simply because it isn't written down anywhere that they have to. That isn't just on the railway of course, and not just litter! However, to be more rail-specific, some TOCs can provide appalling examples of corporate laziness at times. Ask a Guard how often they've had to start a service with a train that's swimming in rubbish, because there are insufficient cleaning staff being made available to make the stock presentable. Or with toilets unserviceable because there was nobody to refill the water at the last turnaround point, or the CET tanks weren't emptied on the depot. Or with defects that haven't been rectified due to lack of time/staff/parts/enthusiasm on a depot. How often do we hear about BR-era stock with knackered aircon on here, slowly roasting staff and passengers alike every summer for the last 20 years? Why were SWT able to operate a fleet of Class 158s with working a/c, yet every other operator of the type still can't, for example? Sometimes companies ignore things, because they don't want to expend the time, effort or money to do something properly. There is, at times, a very valid argument that if people continue to go above and beyond to pick up the pieces, to do a job that the company should be taking responsibility for getting done, it only serves to perpetuate the lack of effort in resolving things. No doubt the same issue occurs across the board, not just within the railway!

Off topic maybe, but I rarely if ever do I notice modern stock with retention toilets getting routinely topped up at terminal stations anymore, presumably by needing considerably less water per flush it’s now only routinely required at nightly servicing points, so TOCs probably wont now be willing to pay for the staffing levels required to tank every train as they did in years gone by .

 

[BestWestern]

Off topic maybe, but I rarely if ever do I notice modern stock with retention toilets getting routinely topped up at terminal stations anymore, presumably by needing considerably less water per flush it’s now only routinely required at nightly servicing points, so TOCs probably wont now be willing to pay for the staffing levels required to tank every train as they did in years gone by .

Indeed, unfortunately though some of them aren't emptied on depots either!

 

[The Ham]

It's a couple of things I think. There are certainly those who won't do something simply because it isn't written down anywhere that they have to. That isn't just on the railway of course, and not just litter! However, to be more rail-specific, some TOCs can provide appalling examples of corporate laziness at times. Ask a Guard how often they've had to start a service with a train that's swimming in rubbish, because there are insufficient cleaning staff being made available to make the stock presentable. Or with toilets unserviceable because there was nobody to refill the water at the last turnaround point, or the CET tanks weren't emptied on the depot. Or with defects that haven't been rectified due to lack of time/staff/parts/enthusiasm on a depot. How often do we hear about BR-era stock with knackered aircon on here, slowly roasting staff and passengers alike every summer for the last 20 years? Why were SWT able to operate a fleet of Class 158s with working a/c, yet every other operator of the type still can't, for example? Sometimes companies ignore things, because they don't want to expend the time, effort or money to do something properly. There is, at times, a very valid argument that if people continue to go above and beyond to pick up the pieces, to do a job that the company should be taking responsibility for getting done, it only serves to perpetuate the lack of effort in resolving things. No doubt the same issue occurs across the board, not just within the railway!

All valid points.

 

[Sleepy]

Developments in this dispute should announced this afternoon by RMT & GA.

 

[dk1]

Developments in this dispute should announced this afternoon by RMT & GA.

It's a good news day

 

[387star]

Can't see the lines on the broads going full DOO

 

[387star]

13 June 2018

RMT Press Office:

Mick Cash, RMT General Secretary, said:

“RMT welcomes the fact that Greater Anglia have put forward an improved offer during a meeting between the management and the union.

“In our view the offer is good enough to be put to the membership with a view to resolving this dispute.

“Therefore the union has suspended industrial action on Greater East Anglia planned for Saturday 16th June and Saturday 23rd June 2018 while we conduct a referendum ballot of our members.”‎

 

[Wivenswold]

Excellent news for everyone.

 

[grumblingalong]

Basics of the proposal:

Conductors to remain safety critical
Drivers to operate doors depending on individual station safety analysis
Conductors to be trained and competent on door operation
Conductors to remain guaranteed on board all routes except Cambridge to Stansted and Liverpool Street to Ipswich where a train will run until a conductor can be provided

 

[LowLevel]

Basics of the proposal:

Conductors to remain safety critical
Drivers to operate doors depending on individual station safety analysis
Conductors to be trained and competent on door operation
Conductors to remain guaranteed on board all routes except Cambridge to Stansted and Liverpool Street to Ipswich where a train will run until a conductor can be provided

With designated diagrams involving the conductor operating the doors throughout to maintain competence.

 

[XDM]

Basics of the proposal:

Conductors to remain safety critical..
Conductors to remain guaranteed on board all routes except Cambridge to Stansted and Liverpool Street to Ipswich where a train will run until a conductor can be provided

Cambridge to Stanstead & Liverpool Street terminating at Ipswich have been DOO for many years.

 

[Domh245]

That strikes me as fairly reasonable, and I would expect the RMT to use that as a baseline/target in their negotiations with Northern & SWR. Presumably the Cambridge-Stansted & Liverpool Street-Ipswich part of the agreement is down to the fact that there are already DOO services over those Routes?

 

[dk1]

That strikes me as fairly reasonable, and I would expect the RMT to use that as a baseline/target in their negotiations with Northern & SWR. Presumably the Cambridge-Stansted & Liverpool Street-Ipswich part of the agreement is down to the fact that there are already DOO services over those Routes?

Yes. It's actually from Ely on the West. NXEAs original Norwich-Stansted plans in 2011 looked at DOO between here & the Airport but was thwarted when Abellio won the short term franchise.

 

[387star]

If this goes through I'd be interested to see how stations are selected for guard or driver door operation

 

[OxtedSignaller]

If this goes through I'd be interested to see how stations are selected for guard or driver door operation

I would imagine it would be every station bar the competency diagrams. Any stations which flag up any significant issues will probably either gain/retain platform staff dispatch. Either you have the Guard operating the doors, or you have the driver operating the doors. Anything else will just cause confusion.

 

[Robertj21a]

Doors, doors , doors.........

Unbelievable that this is still viewed as such a key issue.

 

[Z12XE]

Drivers to operate doors depending on individual station safety analysis

Has that been put to ASLEF yet?

 

[LowLevel]

I would imagine it would be every station bar the competency diagrams. Any stations which flag up any significant issues will probably either gain/retain platform staff dispatch. Either you have the Guard operating the doors, or you have the driver operating the doors. Anything else will just cause confusion.

I'd not be at all surprised if stations like Norwich retain conductor dispatch.

 

[dk1]

Has that been put to ASLEF yet?

Yes it has. Talks been going on for some time.

 

[grumblingalong]

I'd not be at all surprised if stations like Norwich retain conductor dispatch.

Norwich and Liverpool Street would not surprise me, better management of late runners. Although LST may make the DOO south of Ipswich bit tricky.