So disabled passengers could catch a 313, they best make sure they won't need to use the loo on their journey
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Southern DOO: ASLEF members vote 79.1% for revised deal
- Thread starter hornbyfan99
- Start date
- Status
So disabled passengers could catch a 313, they best make sure they won't need to use the loo on their journey
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
As a passenger you will have to know which it is in advance and if they switch stock tough luck I guess.
So two days before you decide to travel. You find a time. Ring up and ask what the rolling stock will be. May be they will be able to tell you or may be not.
Then if it's the right type you can turn up on the day if you like. If not you book. Still you might as well book anyway just to be safe.
Is my understanding of the stupid situation that is looming correct?
Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Well that's no different to those of us with health issues that require the use of a loo on lines where no trains have loos and a lot for the stations are unstaffed so the loos are locked out of use.
In either case the TOCs don't care it seems.
Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk
You have to remember, they were born out of the roots of getting rights for the working person, and from them the Labour Party was born, so of course they are going to have a political view. They want the best for their members. Whether, they go about it the right way, is up for debate. Some unions are more political than others. Most give donations to parties, used to be all Labour, but the New Labour track miffed off a few, so they went with parties that they liked their view. On the other hand, the Tories get their money from Big Business and Hedge Funds etc who have a different kind of view to how the system should work. And then you have UKIP, who want to go back to the 1950's
Anyway, back off this tangent. I've still got no post.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Again, yes
Last edited:
It connects to National Rail Enquiries, the emergency button (oddly the green one) connects to a staff member in the Control Room.
But someone without mobility issues if caught short could if necessary get of at a convinient stop and find a convinience. Not so easy for a disabled person
speedy_sticks
On Moderation
- Joined
- 24 Oct 2013
- Messages
- 183
They can't connect you to assistance, South West Trains button goes straight to their call centre, the way it should be!!
But at least we can ask a guard to get us off.
When OBS comes in, disabled and vulnerable are screwed as they don't have very many staffed stations on that route and no guarantee that you will have an OBS person on the service.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
But at least we can ask a guard to get us off.
When OBS comes in, disabled and vulnerable are screwed as they don't have very many staffed stations on that route and no guarantee that you will have an OBS person on the service.
Except the whole Virgin Trains West Coast lawsuit....
It still needs saying over and over again that in this debate, we are discussing a concession...not a franchise...
Do I have to de-bunk this yet again? GTR is a franchise; it's just a franchise with next to no revenue risk. At least according to the DfT. I could go into the reasons for this, but they're irrelevant.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Yes, it's a franchise. I linked to the franchise agreement earlier, but a simple Google search will find it.
Having said I wouldn't I'll now say why IMO it was a franchise and not a concession. Simply put DfT did not want to create a whole new set of documentation for a one-off event. Therefore they took the standard franchise agreement and made changes. It's a bit of a pig's ear, but it saved time and money.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I don't think so. Like other parts of GTR you will need to ring in advance and book assistance. I don't imagine that they would put you on a Cl313 if your journey was 30+ minutes (assuming a reasonable level of competency, which may be going too far with GTR).
Last edited:
Very true, but even accounting for inflation won't that mostly be due to the much improved wages paid to the equivalent railway grades today?
Last edited:
D1009
Established Member
Thank you for explaining that, and it looks as though Modern Railways got it wrong.
Apparently trains that had a guard will have a guard or OBS. If an OBS is not available the train will still run with just the driver.
speedy_sticks
On Moderation
- Joined
- 24 Oct 2013
- Messages
- 183
Wiithout a guaranteed percentage of OBS cover, this policy will easily be abused to run more services OBS free.
So if a train is canceled and the next one is not for two hours, is that an emergency for the passenger? I would be tempted to contact information because no one is in danger.
Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk
coppercapped
Established Member
Oh dear, this discussion is all about definitions and misunderstandings...
Essentially in all cases, the DfT (or Transport Scotland and in future the WAG) awards a contract to a TOC to manage a geographically defined set of train services.
If the income from the fares accrues directly to the TOC then the conventional name in the railway world for such a deal is a franchise. In this arrangement the TOC pays the costs of operation out of the income as well as any premium payments to the DfT and retains an amount, usually about 3%, as profit for the TOC's owners.
If the income from the fares accrues directly to the DfT then the conventional name for such an arrangement in the railway world is a concession. In this arrangement the TOC is paid a management fee which covers the cost of operation, about 3% of the fee is taken as profit for the TOC's owners.
For both types of deal the bulk of the contract terms will be the same if not identical. The only difference between the two is which party receives the fares income.
Thus SWT is termed a franchise and TSGN is a concession. Modern Railways got it right.
Not so if all the station toilets are locked up and not abilene due to the ticket offices being closed. Also the next train might not be for an another hour.
Thr Cobham line doesn't have toilets open for that long. I don't know the full opening hours of ticket offices on that line. It's fine once you reach Surbiton of course but that's still 30 minutes away from Guildford.
The Gatwick Airport to Reading line is one with just one or two trains an hour. Recently I got on it at Gatwick Airport when it arrived. Once we left I went to find a loo and couldn't find one working. I noticed this once I got to Redhill.
By now it got to the stage where if I go I'd have to catch the next train. As I was with someone else I decided to chance it. It was an uncomfortable journey back from there to Guildford. Of course had the guard said something about the toilets, I'd have gone at Gatwick Airport.
If the guard didn't know, then their response to me telling them the loos were not working sounded like they did. No announcement about the loos at anytime after I spoke to them though.
I'd also be concerned that if I did use a station loo and they had a look break, I'd get left behind. I can be slower on the loo.
I admit this isn't the same as trying to board a train without a guard but it can still be an issue for people. Good job I've never got stuck on a train for hours without a loo or working loo.
Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk
They may have been calling it a concession because there is little revenue risk. In that way it is quite like LO, which is a concession. However, unlike LO, GTR retain the responsibility for marketing and ancillary revenue, as well as all the other measures DfT has taken to ensure that they do a good job in pushing sales.
DfT went this route because of the huge risks around the Thameslink Programme. It wanted to avoid bidders reflecting the revenue risk in their bids and also the no doubt endless use of the change mechanism. They do not want to move, in the long term, towards a concession-type arrangement, probably for political reasons.
Robertj21a
On Moderation
- Joined
- 22 Sep 2013
- Messages
- 7,520
For me, the real significance is that GTR hands over the fares, so has very limited risk (fairly close, as you say, to LO). I can now see that although it's not a full 'normal' concession, it's also not a full 'normal' franchise - not at all surprising that anyone should misunderstand how it is supposed to work in practice.
With regard to DOO, it now better explains why GTR is just doing whatever Dft demands.
Well with any luck the team that responds to emails is reading the RMT releases and learning lessons as the RMT releases might be garbage and missing the point but they are a lot better than any response you get to an email sent to Southern!
Southerns response to emails is just dreadful, they never answer the question in any shape or form.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Paul I am afraid YOU are the one who keeps bringing up the 1970's and socialists...
Please can you and others stop derailing (excuse the pun) this thread I am fed up now with the DOO/guards debate being turned into a political bitchfest!
But it is political as it is the government deciding Southern should go to DOO!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Presumably under the new scheme what happens is a disabled person requiring the ramp turns up at the station. The train arrives, and they move right up to the doors awaiting the guard or OBS to deploy the ramp.
There isnt one on board, but now the train cant go anywhere as the driver cant close the doors safely! So driver needs to walk down the train to speak to the disabled person and explain why they cant travel, and presumably help them arrange alternative transport.
Incidentally there's a lot in the thread about dispatch, we seem to have forgotten about the benefits of 2 safety trained staff if there is an incident on route, the ability for the 2nd staff member to try and fix technical issues etc
Information is for information, I think a disabled customer stranded at a station qualifies as a good enough reason to hit the emergency button.
I keep reading again and again in GTR literature ... That all gated stations will be staffed from 'first to last' but then when you read the hours of the 'proposed' station hosts these don't match. Mornings are better with maybe up to 30 mins short before staffing but the evenings can be as long as 3hrs ... I wonder if GTR are planning on 'non' station host staff during these times ?:roll:
Why is it disgraceful? If a much larger number of staff than normal have phoned in sick then what exactly is wrong with saying that. It's factually correct. The public may choose to take a view as to what is causing that excess sickness. Some will view it as the staff are being bullied, others will regard it as quasi-industrial action. That's up to them.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I would agree that this is a political dispute. GTR would not be headed this way without at the very least the tacit support of the government, but it feels much more likely that the govt is pulling the strings.
From the govt's perspective it doesn't see why DOO operation shouldn't be operated more widely more than 30 years after the original fight to introduce it with the introduction of the Midland Electrics service (when the brand new Class 317s stood idle for around 12 months, along with all the newly installed electrification). Since then it has been introduced in many locations, and appears to operate effectively and safely. (How many deaths, serious injuries are attributable to no second person on board over that 30 year + period? I don't know the answer to this, and would be interested if anyone does.)
From the union's perspective, it is a clear attack on their members working conditions and maybe jobs. Historically the railway unions have been very effective at fighting their members' corner, not least because of the disruption that they can cause in the event of them taking action. With Scotrail and maybe one or other of the Northern operators going down a similar route, they are minded to dig their heels in, as the consequences of a loss on GTR will have a wider effect across the industry.
With one caveat, I believe the govt, sorry GTR, will win this dispute. That's because, if it comes to it, it would be relatively quick to train up new onboard staff, and don't forget, what GTR is proposing means that their trains won't (in the main) need a second person to operate. So any disruption would not be as massively disruptive as would have been in the old days, and many office staff now have the ability to work at home, again reducing the impact on passengers.
The caveat is, of course, ASLEF. They would appear to hold the trump card in the wider dispute. However, as their argument cannot be based on an attack of their members' rights and jobs, there may be less public opinion behind them. A lot of their argument is around the difficulty safely despatching the longest (12 car) trains, and this won't be an issue outside the south east.
It's worth noting that the industry does generally appear better prepared in the event of strike action than in the past. Last year's strikes on GWR saw a reasonable service on many (though not all) lines, improving on each day. I suspect that resulted in the strikes petering out, with the RMT regrouping and biding their time to launch a joint offensive with ASLEF, who, as noted above, are in a much better position to cause widespread disruption.
speedy_sticks
On Moderation
- Joined
- 24 Oct 2013
- Messages
- 183
Utter rubbish!
From the strike days until about the 23rd of may, 'high levels of sickness' was caused by Southern banning striking guards from working overtime and maybe also working their rest days. Short forming services is no excuse! Only thing u can think of is that the lessor stock they run, the less they pay the ROSCO's.
I can't prove this fir the later period, but I suspect that it's caused by mix between still restricting SOME strikers from doing overtime and rest day and their intermediate plan they agreed to with the DfT.
Last edited:
I fail to see a cause and effect here. If you are trying to say that there wasn't a high level of sickness then you need to support that in some way. There were 475 conductors last I knew (and it's unlikely to have increased - Southern suggest it has gone down as it says the 74 sick conductors is "1 in 6"). Their exact figures are 1066 sick days over the last 32 working days. If Conductors work 5 days from 7 on average then they should have worked c.23 of those, so the sickness rate is over 10%. This is high and the claim that it has doubled since pre-strike levels seems likely to be true. Many non-rail staff will think that even pre-strike levels are high.
This is clearly not the only cause of cancellations, but it will have caused some cancellations and therefore given GTR a chance to once again blame it all on the conductors.
OTOH I'm surprised it's not bigger - if I was striking for 1 day and getting 2 days pay deducted I would be very tempted to take that extra day back...
Last edited:
speedy_sticks
On Moderation
- Joined
- 24 Oct 2013
- Messages
- 183
I take what I said as fact, because whenever I bring this up with their twitter team they don't respond, bare in mind that could be legally accountable for anything they say wrong on Twitter.
Silence speaks for itself.
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...hameslink-remedial-plan.pdfQUOTE=HH;2578162]I fail to see a cause and effect here. If you are trying to say that there wasn't a high level of sickness then you need to support that in some way. There were 475 conductors last I knew (and it's unlikely to have increased - Southern suggest it has gone down as it says the 74 sick conductors is "1 in 6"). Their exact figures are 1066 sick days over the last 32 working days. If Conductors work 5 days from 7 on average then they should have worked c.23 of those, so the sickness rate is over 10%. This is high and the claim that it has doubled since pre-strike levels seems likely to be true. Many non-rail staff will think that even pre-strike levels are high.
This is clearly not the only cause of cancellations, but it will have caused some cancellations and therefore given GTR a chance to once again blame it all on the conductors.
OTOH I'm surprised it's not bigger - if I was striking for 1 day and getting 2 days pay deducted I would be very tempted to take that extra day back...[/QUOTE]
Silence speaks for itself.
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...hameslink-remedial-plan.pdfQUOTE=HH;2578162]I fail to see a cause and effect here. If you are trying to say that there wasn't a high level of sickness then you need to support that in some way. There were 475 conductors last I knew (and it's unlikely to have increased - Southern suggest it has gone down as it says the 74 sick conductors is "1 in 6"). Their exact figures are 1066 sick days over the last 32 working days. If Conductors work 5 days from 7 on average then they should have worked c.23 of those, so the sickness rate is over 10%. This is high and the claim that it has doubled since pre-strike levels seems likely to be true. Many non-rail staff will think that even pre-strike levels are high.
This is clearly not the only cause of cancellations, but it will have caused some cancellations and therefore given GTR a chance to once again blame it all on the conductors.
OTOH I'm surprised it's not bigger - if I was striking for 1 day and getting 2 days pay deducted I would be very tempted to take that extra day back...[/QUOTE]
D1009
Established Member
We're on the same wavelength. Modern Railways were wrong in calling it a concession, but for the purposes of the point they were making in the article, it was easier to call it one.
So an accusation that isn't denied is automatically a true fact?
So it's "utter rubbish", but you can't prove otherwise. The Southern website specifically says "high level of conductor and driver sickness". Whatever many people think of GTR, I don't believe they would put out a very explicit statement knowing it to be untrue, especially one that can be verified.
I'd have hoped from the rest of my comments that you would see I have tried to give a neutral view of the dispute, albeit then giving who I suspect will ultimately prevail. My comment about the level of staff sickness was in a similar vein - if it is indeed accurate then I don't see why GTR should not give that as the reason for cancellations.
plymothian
Member
If the idea of an OBS (and the same way with GWR TMs) is that he/she doesn't do the doors so they are inside the train doing revenue and "customer service", then he/she has no reason to to stop what they are doing when the train is at a station. So, the OBS would be unaware there is someone on the platform who needs assistance.
If GTR will then want an OBS to stop what they are doing when the train calls at a station to keep a look out just in case, then the OBS is then just doing what a guard does now.
If GTR will then want an OBS to stop what they are doing when the train calls at a station to keep a look out just in case, then the OBS is then just doing what a guard does now.
gimmea50anyday
Established Member
No, I have to agree, the rail industry IS far better prepared for strike action. My managers hold credentials to conduct and in some cases drive too. VTEC have been training managers as strike busters in readiness for their own DOO battles still to come with the introduction of IEP.
As we are seeing a significant number of GTR trains are still running with the strike so the impact is minimal. It's time all the rail unions got their heads together and co-ordinated their action. If ASLEF really don't want DOO as much as RMT then strike TOGETHER! All other TOCS with DOO intentions should also walk in one mass co-ordinated action. Then there will be far more of a chance of officialdom taking notice when the entire country grinds to a halt.
At the moment it looks to me more like the RMT are going out with a whimper and that doesn't appear to be having any effect. Especially after viewing the sort of letters and threats GTR staff have received. That concerns me as I myself may be facing the same fight in a few years and I'm worried several contributors on here will be forced out of a job in a few short weeks.
As we are seeing a significant number of GTR trains are still running with the strike so the impact is minimal. It's time all the rail unions got their heads together and co-ordinated their action. If ASLEF really don't want DOO as much as RMT then strike TOGETHER! All other TOCS with DOO intentions should also walk in one mass co-ordinated action. Then there will be far more of a chance of officialdom taking notice when the entire country grinds to a halt.
At the moment it looks to me more like the RMT are going out with a whimper and that doesn't appear to be having any effect. Especially after viewing the sort of letters and threats GTR staff have received. That concerns me as I myself may be facing the same fight in a few years and I'm worried several contributors on here will be forced out of a job in a few short weeks.
- Status