Southern DOO: ASLEF members vote 79.1% for revised deal

[HowardGWR]

In which case the TOC would be fully justified in saying any subsequent offer will be 3.9% minus the cost of any industrial action.

There is nothing stopping them making a lower offer, legally, or indeed, no offer at all.

 

[Robertj21a]

Some areas are higher in crime than others, why would it suddenly explode if the non commercial guard name gets changed, unless that mugger currently forced to wait outside the station in a darken area feels more comfortable waiting on the platform to cause crime or carry out antisocial behaviour. Having a guard didn't stop that poor girl in Witton(?) getting attacked outside the station.

Wait, its the RMT who once deemed that an accident when a drunk person walked into a lamppost in a station carpark was the fault of the train running without a guard, or someone tripping over a step rushing for a train.

Surely not the same RMT who were more concerned with foreign ownership, FatCats, issuing appalling media statements, Thatcher, etc etc ?

 

[jon0844]

Has anyone seen the videos they've produced to show why guards are so essential? From the view counts, it seems very few have.

 

[Goldfish62]

Surely not the same RMT who were more concerned with foreign ownership, FatCats, issuing appalling media statements, Thatcher, etc etc ?

You forgot Cuba.

 

[CN75]

I think 2017 will go down as the year in which the RMT finally 'lost the plot'. The organisation seems to need so much attention, and renewal, at so many levels, that members must be hoping that they can do something in 2018 to salvage what remains of it.

The RMT is a demoncratic organisation and this is a strength and a great weakness. The problem is that the executive and all of the local representatives are elected. Usually these are old hands who waged wars and were railway staff beforehand in a different era. They have poor internet and media skills. They are weak negotiators because they’re not experienced and because most of them are similar and have similar histories, they overrate each other. While the world has changed beyond recognition since British Rail, the RMT has not. The reps are rarely challenged and to a point run a racket at most locations. They can generally show a long record of achieving big pay rises and better terms and conditions since privatisation. But dig deeper and this is generally just for guard grades. Platform staff and others have all been left behind in terms of wages. Guards have always had the power to cause massive financial pain for the companies making surrender the best option. This is what the DfT have now insured against.

The RMT also don’t seem to accept in public that all companies are different and should be negotiated separately (unlike ASLEF). It’s madness not to accept the OBS grade at Southern and instead let GTR do largely what it likes, and recruit new staff who take one look at the bitter old RMT reps and colleagues and believe their £20 a month would be better spent.

Too many staff got used to the RMT being able to demand and get everything because of the strike threat, including people who should have been sacked having issues swept under the carpet. The RMT should sit down and forget about the idea of Jeremy Corbyn being the saviour who could possibly get elected in five years time. It would make sense to have a plan B and look at each company and figure out what the minimum that company/the government can and would accept to get the headache of strikes off the news. Probably this means accepting that some guard jobs change, but the government clearly didn’t realise the equality act issues about DOO and are now trying to achieve the reforms in spite of it. This is a useful chip for the RMT to use - but their strategy is wasting the power. Any G4S style agency employee with a ramp in a yellow coat at a station can make the whole equality issue go away legally if the RMT will not discuss changes under any circumstances.

Strike on and there’s a high chance what limited industrial power that remains will all get used up. Companies get their contingency plans sorted and reliable, and more and more break the strike. On SWR the proposals do not even affect the majority of the guards - who seriously believes they will go on striking in the long run? Hopefully the RMT will accept that their 2017 tactics handbook is totally spent and that they need to be a lot more intelligent in 2018. The recent press release about SWR crime hot spots which blatantly lies that SWR have said they will get rid of train guards suggests that socialist propaganda tactics are still the preferred methods. It won’t work...

 

[InOban]

Just for comparison, in my local authority the staff are on normal rates between 6am and 8pm, seven days a week. They get a premium for late night/ early mornings, and of course for overtime. Some are on annualised hours, is they're contracted for, say, say 1800 hours a year. Many of these people are paid a third of a driver.
The days when Sunday can be regarded as overtime are past.

 

[otomous]

Well, what those staff are on compared to a train driver is totally irrelevant, I’d hazard a guess the majority of them don’t have the physical lives of thousands of people directly in their care, but let’s leave that one for the next wages debate.

So our Sundays shouldn’t be regarded as overtime but their late and early hours premiums are fine?

I’m on the same rate from 00.00 to 23-59 Monday to Saturday. Nothing extra for working through the night, going home at 2am, or getting up at 3am. There is overtime for Sundays Bank Holidays and Rest Days ie working your day off.

Most TOCS have a four day working week for drivers, balancing out at a 36 hour week over the total length of the roster, based around patterns of days Monday to Saturday, and this is what drivers are paid for. Therefore Sundays ARE overtime.

Yet again, it isn’t the unions blocking this. It is cheaper for the TOCs to pay overtime instead of recruiting the necessary extra staff for a more solid Sunday service.

Yet again, it is a safety critical job. Extra time worked is less time resting, which could affect the driver’s ability to perform, and affect his safety of the line record and his career. Not to mention the passengers in his care. Therefore overtime needs to be rewarded as it is at the driver’s risk.

 

[ComUtoR]

I don't get overtime on a Sunday and I'm a Driver.

 

[CentralTrainer]

You forgot Cuba.

Or the nasty Marxists trying to take over the Labour Party

 

[otomous]

I don't get overtime on a Sunday and I'm a Driver.

Thank you! Meant to say also, a couple of TOCs DO have Sundays in the working week! Personally I’d be happy to see this happen across the board.

 

[OxtedSignaller]

Thank you! Meant to say also, a couple of TOCs DO have Sundays in the working week! Personally I’d be happy to see this happen across the board.

As someone who works for a TOC where Sunday is outside of the working week (not a driver) I would prefer it wasn’t in the working week consolidate it all into your normal salary and there would be no point working any Sundays which aren’t rostered if it pays the same rate which could just make the problem even worse.

Also makes no sense financially for TOCs to make it inside the week as said above you’ve got more staff to pay, and also a lot of staff at little stations for example or who don’t work Sundays such as relief would be getting a pay rise when they don’t even work Sundays...

In the majority of cases Sunday is no different to any other day in some ways it’s an even better service I find on a lot of days. Your always going to have shortfuls over Christmas and Summer for example and that’s simply because drivers don’t want to work restdays. You can either incentivise RDW or reduce the service accordingly. It’s one of them things I’m afraid.

 

[infobleep]

RMT haven't put an offer of 48% increase in Sunday overtime rate at SWR to their members, and I see RMT has just put out a statement claiming there will be an explosion in the level of anti-social behaviour and crime at unmanned SWR stations if guards aren't called guards.

Instead of keeping the guards role the same on 450 and 444s, how about keeping it the same on all rolling stock. Problem then solved and also the right solution in my opinion. But what do I know?

 

[infobleep]

The RMT is a demoncratic organisation and this is a strength and a great weakness. The problem is that the executive and all of the local representatives are elected. Usually these are old hands who waged wars and were railway staff beforehand in a different era. They have poor internet and media skills. They are weak negotiators because they’re not experienced and because most of them are similar and have similar histories, they overrate each other. While the world has changed beyond recognition since British Rail, the RMT has not. The reps are rarely challenged and to a point run a racket at most locations. They can generally show a long record of achieving big pay rises and better terms and conditions since privatisation. But dig deeper and this is generally just for guard grades. Platform staff and others have all been left behind in terms of wages. Guards have always had the power to cause massive financial pain for the companies making surrender the best option. This is what the DfT have now insured against.

The RMT also don’t seem to accept in public that all companies are different and should be negotiated separately (unlike ASLEF). It’s madness not to accept the OBS grade at Southern and instead let GTR do largely what it likes, and recruit new staff who take one look at the bitter old RMT reps and colleagues and believe their £20 a month would be better spent.

Too many staff got used to the RMT being able to demand and get everything because of the strike threat, including people who should have been sacked having issues swept under the carpet. The RMT should sit down and forget about the idea of Jeremy Corbyn being the saviour who could possibly get elected in five years time. It would make sense to have a plan B and look at each company and figure out what the minimum that company/the government can and would accept to get the headache of strikes off the news. Probably this means accepting that some guard jobs change, but the government clearly didn’t realise the equality act issues about DOO and are now trying to achieve the reforms in spite of it. This is a useful chip for the RMT to use - but their strategy is wasting the power. Any G4S style agency employee with a ramp in a yellow coat at a station can make the whole equality issue go away legally if the RMT will not discuss changes under any circumstances.

Strike on and there’s a high chance what limited industrial power that remains will all get used up. Companies get their contingency plans sorted and reliable, and more and more break the strike. On SWR the proposals do not even affect the majority of the guards - who seriously believes they will go on striking in the long run? Hopefully the RMT will accept that their 2017 tactics handbook is totally spent and that they need to be a lot more intelligent in 2018. The recent press release about SWR crime hot spots which blatantly lies that SWR have said they will get rid of train guards suggests that socialist propaganda tactics are still the preferred methods. It won’t work...

Why are the majority of the guards not affected? Is it because of the rolling stock? If so it seems they are only not affecting the majority of guards because it suits them to do so, not because it suits the staff or passengers.

 

[pompeyfan]

Mainline SWR isn’t an issue just yet because the Desiros are under a maintenance contract until about 2027 (I think it was a 25 year contract) and would cost too much for DfT/First to buy out the contract, the diesels are probably close to renewal ages but won’t be altered during this franchise. Personally I’m pleasantly surprised that 442s are being reinstated instead of new builds. Had they gone for new builds then DOO/DCO on mainline would almost certainly appear on the Portsmouth direct.

To answer your question the only reason it hasn’t changed on the mainline is money.....

 

[infobleep]

Mainline SWR isn’t an issue just yet because the Desiros are under a maintenance contract until about 2027 (I think it was a 25 year contract) and would cost too much for DfT/First to buy out the contract, the diesels are probably close to renewal ages but won’t be altered during this franchise. Personally I’m pleasantly surprised that 442s are being reinstated instead of new builds. Had they gone for new builds then DOO/DCO on mainline would almost certainly appear on the Portsmouth direct.

To answer your question the only reason it hasn’t changed on the mainline is money.....

So passengers will suffer slower journeys and more cancelations. :being sarcastic by the way as I want the guard to remain:

 

[387star]

Haven't the new agreed reasons to run without an OBS now taken affect

 

[the sniper]

They can generally show a long record of achieving big pay rises and better terms and conditions since privatisation. But dig deeper and this is generally just for guard grades. Platform staff and others have all been left behind in terms of wages. Guards have always had the power to cause massive financial pain for the companies making surrender the best option. This is what the DfT have now insured against.

I don't think you're depicting this situation correctly. In TOCs I know the RMT have collective bargaining power across all grades outside of the clerical, managerial and driving grades. If the Guards got a basic 2.8% pay increase, so did the platform staff, cleaners, maintenance, ect. If the Guards get anything on top of this it's because of grade specific productivity deals, so selling T&Cs. There is generally more scope for this in the Guards grade as Guards have historically had better and/or more complicated T&Cs than, say, an on train cleaner or TTE, that they could 'sell' to a TOC. It's not unusual for these pay deals to include features like an additional £500 no ties added on to the salary of staff paid under £20k, for example, which might apply to cleaners but means nothing to a Guard.

As such and in line with what you say, the deliberate stripping of power or influence from the Guards, who's position has been used as leverage in these pay talks historically, will impact all grades. Not just RMT grades. Management and clerical grades under the TSSA have always accepted the same percentage AFAIK. ASLEF have sometimes used that percentage as a starting point for their own negotiations, before going on to secure a better deal for their own members... So maybe even their position is slightly weakened in some circumstances.

 

[kw12]

Haven't the new agreed reasons to run without an OBS now taken affect

The agreement on Southern came into force yesterday. It would be interesting to know:
- how many, if any, trains were cancelled yesterday (for at least part of their journey) because no OBS was available. (These trains would previously have operated anyway)
- how many, if any, trains had no OBS yesterday (for at least part of their journey) but operated because the lack of an OBS was due to one of the exceptional circumstances detailed in the agreement

 

[infobleep]

The agreement on Southern came into force yesterday. It would be interesting to know:
- how many, if any, trains were cancelled yesterday (for at least part of their journey) because no OBS was available. (These trains would previously have operated anyway)
- how many, if any, trains had no OBS yesterday (for at least part of their journey) but operated because the lack of an OBS was due to one of the exceptional circumstances detailed in the agreement

Let's hope Govia Thameslink Railway publish such stats to back up why the agreement is better than previously.

 

[Carlisle]

If the Guards got a basic 2.8% pay increase, so did the platform staff, cleaners, maintenance, ect. .

Not really, as on a number of TOCs I can think of virtually all of those functions except platform/ticket office roles are outsourced anyway, including in some cases on train catering

 

[the sniper]

Not really, as on a number of TOCs I can think of virtually all of those functions except platform/ticket office roles are outsourced anyway, including in some cases on train catering

Yeah, really... "In TOCs I know".

At least you agree, in a roundabout way, that CN75's claim that I highlighted is not correct.

 

[Carlisle]

Yeah, really... "In TOCs I know".

At least you agree, in a roundabout way, that CN75's claim that I highlighted is not correct.

Ok as an example, Trans Pennine Exp.
1) Catering- Rail Gourmet
2)Maintenance-Siemens
3)Cleaning -Carlisle Group

 

[OxtedSignaller]

At the end of the day the RMT need to get to the table and agree a deal which ends the dispute... this can’t go on forever surely. Even if they sit down with the company and agree a list of competencies, any changes to pay and conditions and put in place measures which look after the interests of their members and the longevity of the OBS role as well as protecting the Conductors who are still employed. All of this is not helping the members cause end of the day. They are putting their national aims and views above that of local level affairs.

 

[CN75]

I don't think you're depicting this situation correctly. In TOCs I know the RMT have collective bargaining power across all grades outside of the clerical, managerial and driving grades. If the Guards got a basic 2.8% pay increase, so did the platform staff, cleaners, maintenance, ect. If the Guards get anything on top of this it's because of grade specific productivity deals, so selling T&Cs. There is generally more scope for this in the Guards grade as Guards have historically had better and/or more complicated T&Cs than, say, an on train cleaner or TTE, that they could 'sell' to a TOC. It's not unusual for these pay deals to include features like an additional £500 no ties added on to the salary of staff paid under £20k, for example, which might apply to cleaners but means nothing to a Guard.

As such and in line with what you say, the deliberate stripping of power or influence from the Guards, who's position has been used as leverage in these pay talks historically, will impact all grades. Not just RMT grades. Management and clerical grades under the TSSA have always accepted the same percentage AFAIK. ASLEF have sometimes used that percentage as a starting point for their own negotiations, before going on to secure a better deal for their own members... So maybe even their position is slightly weakened in some circumstances.

You’re right and thanks for explaining. You’re also right that the RMT needs guards to be guaranteed on trains to have the power to achieve significant pay rises for the grades it represents (job reorganisation to platform/ticket examiners or ticket offices doesn’t make much waves). Conditions/Agreements can of course get sold either way during bargaining and pay talks.

 

[CN75]

Why are the majority of the guards not affected? Is it because of the rolling stock? If so it seems they are only not affecting the majority of guards because it suits them to do so, not because it suits the staff or passengers.

Because the fleets that aren’t getting replaced during the franchise are not being modified and are not suitable for driver control of doors. The new class 710 trains are for the metro area. SWR want a guard on every one of those trains except when one isn’t available in an unplanned situation from what they are saying. They have a legacy RMT agreement from SWT not to bring in DOO so have to tread carefully. Presumably non DOO except in extraordinary circumstances is considered still true to non DOO as the normal method of operation?

 

[pompeyfan]

It would appear the ASLEF agreement was not quite as water tight as many would have hoped.

I’m sure many situations similar have occurred but would appear that 2 trains last night had to run with no OBS for part of the journey due to poor diagraming. An OBS was apparently given insufficient time on their schedule card to get from one train to the next and the decision was taken to run the service without an OBS.

How does that not breech the ‘exceptional circumstances’?

I know many won’t be surprised to read this sadly.

Final question, I’m sure it’s been asked before but not sure if process has changed, how does the driver know when they do or don’t have 2nd crew?

 

[DarloRich]

It would appear the ASLEF agreement was not quite as water tight as many would have hoped.

I’m sure many situations similar have occurred but would appear that 2 trains last night had to run with no OBS for part of the journey due to poor diagraming. An OBS was apparently given insufficient time on their schedule card to get from one train to the next and the decision was taken to run the service without an OBS.

surely not! Someone more cynical might think that was the plan all along................

 

[XDM]

It would appear the ASLEF agreement was not quite as water tight as many would have hoped.

I’m sure many situations similar have occurred but would appear that 2 trains last night had to run with no OBS for part of the journey due to poor diagraming. An OBS was apparently given insufficient time on their schedule card to get from one train to the next and the decision was taken to run the service without an OBS.
?

Don't worry the train ran completely safely last night & a thousand men,women & children did not have to wait in the freezing cold for the next train.

 

[pompeyfan]

Don't worry the train ran completely safely last night & a thousand men,women & children did not have to wait in the freezing cold for the next train.

The train could have ran 2 minutes late with an OBS providing customer service and disabled assistance.

 

[ComUtoR]

Don't worry the train ran completely safely last night & a thousand men,women & children did not have to wait in the freezing cold for the next train.

Awesome. Now we can start removing the OBS role all together. Clearly they aren't needed either. It would certainly save a massive staffing cost and as passengers do not need them and get home safely without them then there shouldn't be any problems.