Southern DOO: ASLEF members vote 79.1% for revised deal

[Squonk]

There are other grades the unions are ignoring.



The whole industry is watching the situation as the DfT is pushing for more DOO.

If the principle of DOO with up to 12 cars has been set with the appropriate* equipment then it could be extended across the country. The question is Thameslink with its 12 car DOO established that principle already? Especially on the High Capacity Infrastructure (HCI) the Thameslink Core is.

* what is appropriate is up for debate of course

You seem extraordinarily happy that Thameslink run DOO 12 cars,

 

[6Gman]

I am unmoveable in my belief that the vast majority of trains should have at least two members of crew diagrammed on them. I'm a bit more flexible on whether they should both be safety critical and who should be doing doors/dispatch.

I agree (on passenger trains). If something happens en route to the driver I want an identified, trained member of staff to take control of the situation - not some random member of the public with a mobile phone.

 

[Class377/5]

You seem extraordinarily happy that Thameslink run DOO 12 cars, with that in mind would I be right in deducing that you work for Thameslink but are not a train driver ?

just asking

Not happy, just pointing out the fact that Thameslink have run 12 car DOO since 2011. And no-one has not proven why Southern/GatEx drivers are incapable of doing 12 car DOO (but 10 cars is fine) expect the safety card without a single example of where 12 cars vice 10 have actually involved in an incident. The only comments were over 1W95, an 8 car DOO service (where having a guard would have made little difference unless people people he can power up an whole 4 car unit) that happened prior to Thameslink going to 12 car and a change in reaction to train evacuation from the industry.

 

[Squonk]

Not happy, just pointing out the fact that Thameslink have run 12 car DOO since 2011. And no-one has not proven why Southern/GatEx drivers are incapable of doing 12 car DOO (but 10 cars is fine) expect the safety card without a single example of where 12 cars vice 10 have actually involved in an incident. The only comments were over 1W95, an 8 car DOO service (where having a guard would have made little difference unless people people he can power up an whole 4 car unit) that happened prior to Thameslink going to 12 car and a change in reaction to train evacuation from the industry.

I think you're missing the point with the 12 vice 10 argument but ok !,

 

[infobleep]

So should all safety decisions only be taken after someone is injures or killed?

In the 1800s I'm sure staff agreed to all sorts of things that wouldn't be allowed now. Where they all disallowed solely due to injuries and/or deaths?

There is of course the possibility that Thameslink Stagg made a mistake when they agreed DOO for 12 cars on Thameslink, if that is what happens.

Look at the Government. There was ment to be 21 bills in the Queens speech and one, I think it was the hill of rights, was spoken about in advance, including the morning of the speech! It was missing from the speech. Should someone take the government to court for saying they would do something and then changing their mind?

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

 

[380101]

Look at the Government. There was ment to be 21 bills in the Queens speech and one, I think it was the hill of rights, was spoken about in advance, including the morning of the speech! It was missing from the speech. Should someone take the government to court for saying they would do something and then changing their mind?

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

There would never, ever be enough court time ever, to do that!

 

[Dave1987]

How can you justify a union agreeing with one part of a company to do something and not another? Especially when you are talking about the only different being the logo on a drivers uniform. Which is what this debate is all about. not forget that 12 car DOO on TL is a fairly new thing.

London Midland is the same company as well but just with a different logo. Are you really trying to say that all local agreements should be torn up when there is a change of company operating the franchise? Stagecoach operate SWT and the ECML. Should the local agreements and T&C's be changed on SWT to match the ECML simply because its the same company operating both just under a different guise? Your argument is flawed on so many levels!

Aslef have local agreements in place for various depots around the country. What you are suggesting is that when a new company comes in to operate the line they should be able to tear up those local agreements at their leisure.

 

[HLE]

London Midland is the same company as well but just with a different logo. Are you really trying to say that all local agreements should be torn up when there is a change of company operating the franchise? Stagecoach operate SWT and the ECML. Should the local agreements and T&C's be changed on SWT to match the ECML simply because its the same company operating both just under a different guise? Your argument is flawed on so many levels!

Aslef have local agreements in place for various depots around the country. What you are suggesting is that when a new company comes in to operate the line they should be able to tear up those local agreements at their leisure.

Sshh keep it quiet!!

The DFT and their cronies have left LM alone......for now.

 

[infobleep]

Sshh keep it quiet!!

The DFT and their cronies have left LM alone......for now.

Wonder why?

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

 

[HLE]

Wonder why?

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

Might be round 2 if they win the Southern dispute.

None of the units have DOO cameras and monitors, or any platform equipment at the northern end of the network, at least.

Be a wee bit more costly, equipment wise, to introduce than Southern.

 

[Monty]

Wonder why?

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

Probably because there is no existing DOO infrastructure on the majority of the routes. Plus the mainstay of their fleet the Class 350 Desiro will need modifications prior to running without a guard.

 

[D1009]

I think you're missing the point with the 12 vice 10 argument but ok !,

and the second part of my question ?

I believe the forum rules entitle members to not reveal for whom they work, for pretty obvious reasons.

 

[Squonk]

I believe the forum rules entitle members to not reveal for whom they work, for pretty obvious reasons.

Ok, that's fair enough, thank you for highlighting that fact, i've removed the question from my posts.

 

[A-driver]

The whole argument around Thameslink running 12 car DOO is a bit of an accident anyway. WAGN negotiated a 12 car agreement as the was no other way of increasing capacity on the Kings X line. The agreement actually states that as 365s have no walk through between units, all 12 cars would, where possible, carry rpis in the rear unit. This agreement, like that of the OBS on southern, never came to much and if rpis weren't available trains ran single manned.

Upon harmonisation under FCC, Thameslink sort of accidently inherited the DOO 12 car agreement which FCC started to use. The union couldn't do anything as they had, perhaps without realising it or its importance, agreed to allow it at harmonisation.

GTR stated when it took over it would not be harmonising FCC and southern drivers and continues to state that now. However they are trying to harmonise bits by the back door - without negotiating or paying for it. To be clear, southern and gatwick drivers have a completely different employment contract-different pay, conditions and DOO agreements to FCC drivers. So any comparison between FCC and southern drivers and trains is pointless as they remain seperate companies wi seperate contracts and agreements.

Thameslink never formally agreed to extend DOO to 12 cars. It was purely agreed to increase capacity on a few evening peak trains between London and Cambridgeshire.

 

[ainsworth74]

To be clear, southern and gatwick drivers have a completely different employment contract-different pay, conditions and DOO agreements to FCC drivers. So any comparison between FCC and southern drivers and trains is pointless as they remain seperate companies wi seperate contracts and agreements.

But I wonder how a court will see it! Certainly I would presume GTR have been given (no doubt very expensive) legal advice which may well suggest that a court will see it differently to that which is presumably why they're now going back to court.

 

[A-driver]

But I wonder how a court will see it! Certainly I would presume GTR have been given (no doubt very expensive) legal advice which may well suggest that a court will see it differently to that which is presumably why they're now going back to court.

The court case isn't about DOO. It's about Aslef balloting southern over what GTR claims is a Gatwick only issue (GTR claim they are seperate companies). The injunction also appears to be claiming (from what I understand) that Aslef have taken Unofficial action pre-ballot by having a rest day ban. This is dodgy as its up to individual drivers if they want to work rest days or not. If they decide not due to not wanting to help the company out that's up to them and not Aslef action.

 

[ainsworth74]

Ah fair enough, I misunderstood. My apologies.

 

[A-driver]

Ah fair enough, I misunderstood. My apologies.

The first injunction was more along the lines of DOO but not about the safety of it, it was around the wording of agreements and that, whilst the agreement was 10car DOO, the driver contracts had a clause along the lines of working to company instructions. The judge ruled this clause overruled existing agreements surrounding the issue and so, without a legal ballot for action, Aslef could not encourage its members to refuse to drive trains instructed by the company regardless of current agreements (or 12 cars).

 

[infobleep]

But I wonder how a court will see it! Certainly I would presume GTR have been given (no doubt very expensive) legal advice which may well suggest that a court will see it differently to that which is presumably why they're now going back to court.

South West Trains took a land owner to court over a tree. They would have taken legal advice before doing this. They lost.

So just because Southern are taking legal advice, doesn't automatically mean they will win. Not that I'm saying they won't either. I don't know enough details to decide. Hopefully a judge will.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

 

[Carlisle]

This is dodgy as its up to individual drivers if they want to work rest days or not. If they decide not due to not wanting to help the compan.

I guess decisions in the courts may hinge on weather ASLEF actually decided to formally withdraw a read day work agreement if one actually existed, in the first place

 

[ungreat]

I guess decisions in the courts may hinge on weather ASLEF actually decided to formally withdraw a read day work agreement if one actually existed, in the first place

Its still up to the individual over working rest days ..there may well be an agreement but its still up to the individual
I dont and never will work rest days as I dont agree with it

 

[bengley]

Rest day agreements only last for a set period. If they expire and the union choose not to renew them, that's not suspending rest day agreements, it's simply not renewing then!

 

[A-driver]

I guess decisions in the courts may hinge on weather ASLEF actually decided to formally withdraw a read day work agreement if one actually existed, in the first place

As far as I'm aware, they don't have an agreement.

But if drivers as individuals choose not to volunteer for ANY reason (including their personal views on industrial relations) I can't see how the union can be taken to court. It's voluntary overtime and up to individuals to volunteer to come in on their days off. It's not in any way enforceable as overtime.

Sort of sums the company up that, having ****ed off the staff so much that they arnt falling over each other to volunteer to help the company out they are, rather than resolving it by trying to talk to and engage with staff, instead going to court to try and force them into starting up goodwill overtime again!

 

[74A]

As far as I'm aware, they don't have an agreement.

According to ASLEF website there is no agreement but drivers do work their rest days. I am quite surprised because I thought ASLEF had a policy of no RDW unless there is an agreement in place for specific reasons. Thats how it operates at most TOCs.

Anyway if drivers are working rest days suddenly stop working rest days all at once that could be unofficial industrial action. Proving it of course would be a different matter. But if any union official say put something to Facebook to encourage drivers to not work that would probably not be a good idea.

 

[A-driver]

According to ASLEF website there is no agreement but drivers do work their rest days. I am quite surprised because I thought ASLEF had a policy of no RDW unless there is an agreement in place for specific reasons. Thats how it operates at most TOCs.



Anyway if drivers are working rest days suddenly stop working rest days all at once that could be unofficial industrial action. Proving it of course would be a different matter. But if any union official say put something to Facebook to encourage drivers to not work that would probably not be a good idea.

That's exactly it. If the company have evidence someone from Aslef, a rep or someone speaking for Aslef have tried to encourage drivers to stop OT there could be a case to answer.

It seems the ORR are also investigating bullying of staff by GTR regarding the letters sent to guards.

 

[PlatformPete]

The court case isn't about DOO. It's about Aslef balloting southern over what GTR claims is a Gatwick only issue (GTR claim they are seperate companies). The injunction also appears to be claiming (from what I understand) that Aslef have taken Unofficial action pre-ballot by having a rest day ban. This is dodgy as its up to individual drivers if they want to work rest days or not. If they decide not due to not wanting to help the company out that's up to them and not Aslef action.

GTR Are making it up as they go along!
There is no Rest Day Ban in fact Drivers are climbing over each other to work Restdays as they suspect they will be losing money in the coming months!!!

The Ballot cannot be confined to just GX as Southern Drivers regularly also work these services!!!

 

[A-driver]

GTR Are making it up as they go along!

There is no Rest Day Ban in fact Drivers are climbing over each other to work Restdays as they suspect they will be losing money in the coming months!!!



The Ballot cannot be confined to just GX as Southern Drivers regularly also work these services!!!

Like the first injunction, it will be clutching at straws and open to interpretation but down to who's legal team give the best argument in court. It's just their dirty,bullying tactics to deal with this. Why engage with your staff or try to reach an amicable resolution to a dispute you created when you can just air your dirty laundry in public and fight your own workforce in the courts!

 

[HH]

Dorking West, Chilworth and Gomshall are step free as far as I am aware and those stations do not have staff. Well Gomshall currently does but that might not be forever and of the Stagg, they are Network Rail employees.

Great Western Railway services on the North Downs Line have guards but just imagine if this was about DOO on that line!

I wonder how many other step free access stations across the country don't have any staff?

There's quite a few, but they are a minority and generally lightly served. I could list a whole pile of both staffed and unstaffed stations that do not have step-free access. And a pile more where the step free access finishes when the last staff member leaves, which can be quite early, e.g. at Yeovil Jn it's 1920 (access is only via a barrow crossing) and some are earlier still (e.g. plenty of SWT stations are only staffed until 1730, and some are only staffed mornings). So while conductors are of some help to wheelchair passengers, it's not that much, because there are other hurdles.

 

[hello]

According to ASLEF website there is no agreement but drivers do work their rest days. I am quite surprised because I thought ASLEF had a policy of no RDW unless there is an agreement in place for specific reasons. Thats how it operates at most TOCs.

.

there has been no rdw agreement on south central since about 1997/98

 

[HH]

Well how about picking out another company such as Great Western Railways. They also have guards like South West Trains but operate stations that are step free without staff.

I believe that SWT is the only TOC that has a guard on every train. The ex-Thames Trains bit of GWR is largely DOO. I also know the stations better than I do GWR, so I can speak authoritatively about what happens there.

TBH from what I do know of GWR, I would have thought that most non-DOO routes would need to retain a second member of staff on board.