RMT settle dispute with Greater Anglia

[Z12XE]

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

Does that not mean the Ipswich to London former GE services, which currently only have guards on 12 car units as far as Colchester?

 

[OxtedSignaller]

Only saying that based on other TOCs because you get to the point where you don't know what your doing. Happens all the time at East Croydon. Either dispatchers try dispatching to the OBS thinking they are a Conductor, or the other way round to the Driver when there is a Conductor.

I was thinking that bigger stations would be better being DOO with CD/RA or Bat and Flag like Liverpool Street and Norwich. Surely these stations already have Dispatchers and if not I am sure based on the size of the station they can justify it. There is small halts on Southern where following DOO you now have three staff from first to last to dispatch one train every couple of hours.

 

[dk1]

Looks like NO extension of DOO working. All routes that are not passed for it now (North of Ipswich & all Anglia branch lines inc Ely-Norwich/Peterborough) will only operate providing a second safety critical person is rostered onboard.

 

[Dave1987]

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

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

Sorry but that clearly shows you really really don't understand the major issues on the railway. The PTI is the most critical safety area and YES this involves the doors. The biggest area for injury is the PTI so yes it is a key issue.

 

[387star]

There's some odd guard workings like the Sudbury branch and I think Colchester to Walton on the naze and Claxton but only once off the mainline

 

[387star]

List of GA Guard operated trains from their website :
These are the routes where we have conductors:

• Norwich to London, Cambridge, Lowestoft, Great Yarmouth, Sheringham
• Ipswich to Cambridge, Lowestoft, Felixstowe, Peterborough
• Marks Tey to Sudbury
• Manningtree to Harwich
• Clacton/Walton-on-the-Naze to Colchester

 

[Robertj21a]

Sorry but that clearly shows you really really don't understand the major issues on the railway. The PTI is the most critical safety area and YES this involves the doors. The biggest area for injury is the PTI so yes it is a key issue.

No, good try, Dave. You know only too well that I've been on this forum for a very long time now. So, inevitably, I have read all of the numerous comments about doors, PTI, injuries, court cases etc etc. You may be staggered to learn that I even understand them as well.....

It doesn't alter my view that DOORS is the issue that dominates so many of the debates, and disagreements - when it's the overall PTI that should be the focus of prime attention. Everyone moans when the media report that a dispute is 'over who closes the doors' (and the general public laugh at the silliness of it all) - but it's hardly surprising when rail staff and unions also repeat it for ever an a day.

 

[Dave1987]

No, good try, Dave. You know only too well that I've been on this forum for a very long time now. So, inevitably, I have read all of the numerous comments about doors, PTI, injuries, court cases etc etc. You may be staggered to learn that I even understand them as well.....

It doesn't alter my view that DOORS is the issue that dominates so many of the debates, and disagreements - when it's the overall PTI that should be the focus of prime attention. Everyone moans when the media report that a dispute is 'over who closes the doors' (and the general public laugh at the silliness of it all) - but it's hardly surprising when rail staff and unions also repeat it for ever an a day.

You know there was a driver in the high court recently over a PTI incident? It may be a frivolous argument to you but to people who actually do the job it is an extremely important issue.

 

[the sniper]

It doesn't alter my view that DOORS is the issue that dominates so many of the debates, and disagreements - when it's the overall PTI that should be the focus of prime attention. Everyone moans when the media report that a dispute is 'over who closes the doors' (and the general public laugh at the silliness of it all) - but it's hardly surprising when rail staff and unions also repeat it for ever an a day.

When do the mainstream media ever do a railway story justice? I think I was about 10 years old when I realised I had a more comprehensive understanding of railway matters than the newsman talking about it on television... I wouldn't worry about them.

If you understand the weight of responsibility and liability involved for who 'does the doors', but the job security and medium to long term guarantees that responsibility provides to whoever does it, you'll understand why it's so important to both sides to make their final stand on who takes that power.

 

[LowLevel]

Only saying that based on other TOCs because you get to the point where you don't know what your doing. Happens all the time at East Croydon. Either dispatchers try dispatching to the OBS thinking they are a Conductor, or the other way round to the Driver when there is a Conductor.

I was thinking that bigger stations would be better being DOO with CD/RA or Bat and Flag like Liverpool Street and Norwich. Surely these stations already have Dispatchers and if not I am sure based on the size of the station they can justify it. There is small halts on Southern where following DOO you now have three staff from first to last to dispatch one train every couple of hours.

The reason I said Norwich is that all trains bar the London services are already guard self dispatch (including the short slam door set and EMT services). Consequently they only have limited dispatch staff. Having the guard declare the train ready to depart from it's origin seems eminently sensible to me given the amount of late runners you get flinging themselves at the back door.

 

[grumblingalong]

Does that not mean the Ipswich to London former GE services, which currently only have guards on 12 car units as far as Colchester?

At present yes, but we are provided on 12 cars north of Colchester due to Manningtree platforms being a bit cosy and drivers being a bit prone to forgetting the extra 4 coaches. This should be remedied by Automatic SDO on the new trains, meaning any train south of Ipswich in the new agreement.

 

[grumblingalong]

The reason I said Norwich is that all trains bar the London services are already guard self dispatch (including the short slam door set and EMT services). Consequently they only have limited dispatch staff. Having the guard declare the train ready to depart from it's origin seems eminently sensible to me given the amount of late runners you get flinging themselves at the back door.

Very prevalent at Norwich at times and indeed LST, depending on how well the barriers are managed. As a guard on that route I would like to see us do Norwich at least, departure from the origin station is a bit more than just dispatch IMHO (as you know).

 

[Class 170101]

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.

Are 170s allowed to operate DOO though Ely to Stansted. Remember neither Central nor XC run 170s in DOO mode. Otherwise one could sling the guard off at Ely today heading south.

 

[otomous]

You know there was a driver in the high court recently over a PTI incident? It may be a frivolous argument to you but to people who actually do the job it is an extremely important issue.

For some reason, Dave, even though drivers have been on strike and lost money over this issue, they still seem to think we're making it up.

 

[Sleepy]

Are 170s allowed to operate DOO though Ely to Stansted. Remember neither Central nor XC run 170s in DOO mode. Otherwise one could sling the guard off at Ely today heading south.

No DOO on any DMU stock from Ely to Cambridge etc is currently permissible with any TOC

 

[dk1]

Are 170s allowed to operate DOO though Ely to Stansted. Remember neither Central nor XC run 170s in DOO mode. Otherwise one could sling the guard off at Ely today heading south.

Yes they are. Cross Country/Central never had a DOO policy.

 

[LAX54]

I would have thought if you go DOO North of Colchester, there will be no more 12 car EMU's. or if they did, Manningtree would not be a calling point.

 

[Robertj21a]

When do the mainstream media ever do a railway story justice? I think I was about 10 years old when I realised I had a more comprehensive understanding of railway matters than the newsman talking about it on television... I wouldn't worry about them.

If you understand the weight of responsibility and liability involved for who 'does the doors', but the job security and medium to long term guarantees that responsibility provides to whoever does it, you'll understand why it's so important to both sides to make their final stand on who takes that power.

I think you misunderstand me, as does Dave1987 - but that's nothing new......
I fully understand the importance of the PTI and why it needs to be properly addressed in a sensible and professional manner. My point is that rail staff and unions refer to these serious issues in 'shorthand' as 'Doors'. The general public assume that it's just more silliness from the union as they don't understand the significance of door opening or closing. It's for the rail staff to use the whole terminology, not the shorthand.

 

[LowLevel]

I think you misunderstand me, as does Dave1987 - but that's nothing new......
I fully understand the importance of the PTI and why it needs to be properly addressed in a sensible and professional manner. My point is that rail staff and unions refer to these serious issues in 'shorthand' as 'Doors'. The general public assume that it's just more silliness from the union as they don't understand the significance of door opening or closing. It's for the rail staff to use the whole terminology, not the shorthand.

Depends who you're talking to doesn't it. On here, with it's audience of geeky rail staff, commuters and enthusiasts who despite a lot of hot air all round have little influence I refer to the dispatch procedure as 'doors' unless asked to expand because that's what we call it amongst ourselves. If I'm assisting on a train for a colleague I'll ask 'do you want me to get your doors for you'.

If I'm talking to my inspector on a ride out or a manager, or some other august/influential person (believe it or not from my perhaps over passionate postings on here but I do get the odd invite to things like safety working groups as a relatively well respected guard ) then I am quite capable of giving great chapter and verse on the 'platform train interface and professional dispatch policy'.

If I have the odd verbal riposte with a crank on here I'm not really that fussed, without meaning any disrespect!

Where you are quite correct is the union's press releases etc of which I've made no secret that I feel they are poorly worded and ineffectual, both on here and to union officials.

 

[XDM]

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

This proposed deal is a step forward.
I understand DOO prevails on all Liverpool St trains terminating at Ipswich, & also on all Cambridge to Stanstead trains. They have been DOO for years.

 

[LowLevel]

This proposed deal is a step forward.
I understand DOO prevails on all Liverpool St trains terminating at Ipswich, & also on all Cambridge to Stanstead trains. They have been DOO for years.

Nearly - 12 car trains have guards between Colchester and Ipswich and Anglia Cambridge to Stansted services are a fairly new invention (Last couple of years) but have indeed been DOO since inception.

 

[Andrew32]

Dispute resolved

 

[OxtedSignaller]

Great news and a great result. RMT in the East Anglia area have done a great job.

 

[craigybagel]

Dispute resolved

But how can that be?! I thought (according to the common wisdom on this forum) that the RMT were a bunch of militant dinosaurs incapable of change or worthwhile negotiations, and that the only sensible option was for them to bend over and let DOO arrive unchallenged across the country?!

Thankfully they're a lot more sensible and competent then people give them credit for. Hopefully we can move on to similar agreements at the other TOCs in dispute.

 

[OxtedSignaller]

But how can that be?! I thought (according to the common wisdom on this forum) that the RMT were a bunch of militant dinosaurs incapable of change or worthwhile negotiations, and that the only sensible option was for them to bend over and let DOO arrive unchallenged across the country?!

Thankfully they're a lot more sensible and competent then people give them credit for. Hopefully we can move on to similar agreements at the other TOCs in dispute.

The RMT is formed of many branches and committees, some better than others. I am in no way disputing the RMT does a good job of holding companies to account but it does have its pitfalls like with the OBS debacle on Southern. Officially they are in dispute however it's all been brushed under the carpet and forgotten as if it never happened and they wont even recognise the staff.

 

[Sleepy]

GA are reportedly still up the proverbial creek as ASLEF are saying no to extended DOO routes from 2019 !

 

[OxtedSignaller]

GA are reportedly still up the proverbial creek as ASLEF are saying no to extended DOO routes from 2019 !

I thought there was no proposal to extend DOO though this agreement. Yes I know there is disruption clause about DOO running within an existing DOO area but nothing about extending it into anywhere else. I am sure anyway it's nothing that cannot be solved with a nice hefty pay rise.

 

[Robertj21a]

Dispute resolved

How ?

 

[Monty]

How ?

Indeed, does anyone know what the agreement is?

 

[Andrew32]

How ?

RMT secures important breakthrough as Greater Anglia members vote in favour of a deal that underpins the Guard Guarantee

RAIL UNION RMT said today that it has secured an important breakthrough in the long-running campaign over rail safety, security and access after members on Greater Anglia voted by nine to one on a turnout of 80% to accept a new offer which enshrines the Guard Guarantee on their services and calls a halt to the extension of Driver Only Operation.

RMT has hailed the strength and resilience of members on Greater Anglia through 12 days of strike action over almost a year which has been the corner stone in securing todays significant breakthrough.

The union says that the Greater Anglia agreement shows what can be agreed through serious negotiations with the train operators and now turns the spotlight on South Western Railway where eight days of strike action in support of the guard guarantee on SWR trains is due to start next Thursday.

‎RMT General Secretary, Mick Cash said:

“I want to pay tribute to RMT members on Greater Anglia who’s long and determined struggle over the core issue of a railway that’s safe, secure and accessible for all has been the foundation of the agreement that they have approved in the referendum ballot today. It is the resilience of RMT members over almost a year that has secured the guard guarantee on Greater Anglia trains that we have been seeking. They are a credit to the entire trade union movement.

“The spotlight now shifts to South Western Railway where RMT members are preparing to begin a programme of eight days of strike action from next Thursday. If we can reach a negotiated settlement on Greater Anglia that has safety, security and access its core then there is no reason why we can’t achieve the same on SWR if the company are prepared to get down to business.

“The Greater Anglia agreement comes after similar deals have been done, including negotiated settlements across Scotland and Wales, that have the Guard Guarantee at their core. We now need to roll that principle out to the train companies where we remain in dispute and deliver the kind of safe, secure and accessible railway for all that the travelling public rightly demand.”