Indeed. ASLEF is not striking about DOO or safety. They are striking because they say any changes need to be negotiated. But as there policy is no more DOO I can't see how they will ever agree to it.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both 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
Indeed. ASLEF is not striking about DOO or safety. They are striking because they say any changes need to be negotiated. But as there policy is no more DOO I can't see how they will ever agree to it.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Normally each sides presents available evidence to a court, and the judges make a judgement. Though I dare say if Comrade Corbyn ever got in, we'd end up as a banana republic, and hearsay would be the order of the day. People would go round accusing others of all-sorts of unspeakable deeds and the secret police would go round knocking them off. We don't like x group of people because everyone says so.
Speaking as someone from a civilised society, I respectfully disagree. It would be nice in a way if all interested parties would present actual evidence for public scrutiny so we can all see. Until then, the case seems rather weak given the available data and the judgement the people responsible for regulation and safety.
Thats because they think the public don't know that it's the government behind the whole dispute and are pulling the strings, and if they answer the questions they will reveal this fact. How wrong they are in their assumption.
Truth is is fishy from all sides, they all hide behind 'commercial confidentiality', and nobody is answerable. They all have vested interests enjoy the proceeds of our money and use the public as pawns. The whole thing is very shameful.
The rumour is untrue. 'No holes barred RMT' would have shouted it to the heavens if it was true.
I guess wishful thinking by RMT,perhaps prompted by an off the cuff management remark, that is all.
Personally I am of the opinion having read the RAIB reports in to trap and drag accidents that guard dispatch is safer, I also believe a 2nd person on the train is important, however the reason I support the strikes the way I do, even though they are a pain in the ass, is because I detest the spin about the jobs being safe in the long term.
I do think the RMT could have done their PR a lot better, ASLEF certainly has, and the guys from ASLEF always look more professional when interviewed, but until the DfT own up about how long long term is I will continue to criticise them, not that it makes a difference!
GTR chief operating officer Nick Brown said that the judge said it was safe. Would be good to have a quote from the judge directly and in context.
Sent from my SM-T810 using Tapatalk
Robertj21a
On Moderation
- Joined
- 22 Sep 2013
- Messages
- 7,677
Fair comment, but the reality is that no jobs are safe in the long term. They've never been 'safe' for more than the notice period of 1 week/1 month etc in many businesses so it's somewhat unrealistic to expect any employer/government to guarantee employment for the longer term.
Yet we have a government who loves to spin that they are all about well paid jobs and growth?
Robertj21a
On Moderation
- Joined
- 22 Sep 2013
- Messages
- 7,677
Yes, and that's true. Still doesn't say that jobs can be guaranteed for lengthy periods - that's why I'm confused by the [unrealistic?] demands from rail staff/unions.
A second person aboard the train who is highly trained is something that can be guaranteed. the government do not wish to guarantee it though as they want rid of staff to try and remove as much union membership on the railway as possible.
What business has the government in mandating a privately run company to change their own staffing operations?
I do not believe OBS' are long term in the slightest - I'm sure they would have been done away with already but for the publicity side of things.
Southern hired extra staff to man platforms and busy stations and the overcrowding issues; there were plenty until recently - no sooner public scrutiny laxed the numbers quickly dwindled?!?
The same will be true of the OBS' as history has continously taught us.
The fact of the matter is Southern in particular has had agreements in place over DOO running and have decided to no longer discuss the matter but go in their own direction regardless. The convenient construction of GTR has given the ability to railroad this through with the claim that the other entities do it already - so what is the problem?
This whole experiment (though as clever as first thought) was not given the full consideration necessary and if it was, then what is at present taking place was already expected... I ask you, who is to blame here and why havr those in position to involve themselves in this dispute so against doing so?
This whole thing in my mind is heavily geared game of chess - not the making of either Southern or the Unions.
I do not believe OBS' are long term in the slightest - I'm sure they would have been done away with already but for the publicity side of things.
Southern hired extra staff to man platforms and busy stations and the overcrowding issues; there were plenty until recently - no sooner public scrutiny laxed the numbers quickly dwindled?!?
The same will be true of the OBS' as history has continously taught us.
The fact of the matter is Southern in particular has had agreements in place over DOO running and have decided to no longer discuss the matter but go in their own direction regardless. The convenient construction of GTR has given the ability to railroad this through with the claim that the other entities do it already - so what is the problem?
This whole experiment (though as clever as first thought) was not given the full consideration necessary and if it was, then what is at present taking place was already expected... I ask you, who is to blame here and why havr those in position to involve themselves in this dispute so against doing so?
This whole thing in my mind is heavily geared game of chess - not the making of either Southern or the Unions.
Thats true but in this case it is plainly obvious that this change is solely about breaking the power of the RMT, changing guards to OBS, and then sacking them all.
There is no other logical reason for the amount being spent on this dispute. If this was a genuine change in role fair enough, but its plainly not.
Well all the unions want is that there will always be a second member of staff onboard the train for safety. ScotRail did the deal so I don't see why it's unrealistic TBH. The only reason the deal can't be done is that the government seems to want the railway unions quashed. Railways are the last haven of decent pay, conditions and pensions and clearly government ministers hate that!
Well the government are very very very keen to get the PR spin machine out when jobs are secured for lengthy periods but they keep very very quiet when job losses are announced. I believe that the government are letting their hatred of unions get in the way of a deal being done. I'm sure many of the ministers in our glorious government would happily see all unions quashed and the race to the bottom commence!
Last edited:
Yet the Rail unions want nationalisation! You couldn't make it up!
Someone will tell me it's all those Tories in a minute, bring back the 98% tax rate for higher earners (even though it brought in less tax) get rid of secret ballots for Unions. Even though the country was running out of steam in 1969 because of demands, hence Labour minister Barbara Castle's "In place of strife", a paper that talked about enforcing settlements in front of an industrial board.
The belief in the magic money tree and jobs for life goes on.
If the guards were that valuable they'd be keeping them, I for one do not want the railway as a job creation scheme.
Someone will tell me it's all those Tories in a minute, bring back the 98% tax rate for higher earners (even though it brought in less tax) get rid of secret ballots for Unions. Even though the country was running out of steam in 1969 because of demands, hence Labour minister Barbara Castle's "In place of strife", a paper that talked about enforcing settlements in front of an industrial board.
The belief in the magic money tree and jobs for life goes on.
If the guards were that valuable they'd be keeping them, I for one do not want the railway as a job creation scheme.
Last edited:
highdyke you really really do portray yourself as the elitist 'I'm alright Jack'. Would you rather Amazon and Sports Direct created a few thousand minimum wage jobs with terrible conditions to bump up those employment figures? Do you really hate the fact that railway workers still have good wages, conditions and pensions? I think it's no coincidence that the railways have strong unions and are the last haven of decent pay and conditions. Kinda shows you the complete shower of s*** this country is turning into.
Last edited:
But we're all paying for it.. You don't seem to make that connection in your mind.
What's making people worse off in this country is high housing costs and high travel costs. You want higher taxes to pay for your indulgences, then charge everyone the highest fares in Europe to fund non-jobs
There's no comparison with unskilled Amazon or Sports Direct workers, and I seem to remember condemning that. I support the living wage and German style rents as well as subsidising the railway but not at any cost.
You call me elitist, this reminds me of you.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KdOCWUgwiWs
What's making people worse off in this country is high housing costs and high travel costs. You want higher taxes to pay for your indulgences, then charge everyone the highest fares in Europe to fund non-jobs
There's no comparison with unskilled Amazon or Sports Direct workers, and I seem to remember condemning that. I support the living wage and German style rents as well as subsidising the railway but not at any cost.
You call me elitist, this reminds me of you.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KdOCWUgwiWs
Last edited:
Your confusing an ordinary private company operating in a competitive marketplace with passenger rail which in the U.K. anyway is a government subsidised natural monopoly as it stands at present
Last edited:
So basically as long as you can have a decent standard of living sod anyone below you? I think it's absolutely terrible that the pay and conditions on the railway is the exception and not the norm. All the unions are doing is protecting safety and jobs which is exactly what they are supposed to do. Your rhetoric makes me believe you support the terrible situation this country is in with wages and conditions of workers.
The problem is we dont know how valuable they are until there is an incident where we need them. We can be certain that Southern wont be telling us how often trains are cancelled or dont stop as the on-board equipment has failed.
They also wont be telling us how often a train is delayed longer as it had a fault a guard could have fixed but it took longer as the driver had to do it.
Accidents are fortunately rare but there will be a huge argument if Southern suffer a trap and drag on a DOO train in the next 18 months or so.
Also its not really as though the removal can be justified on the grounds that the railway is losing money. Southern is one of the few areas that has actually made money over the years, revenue covering all costs, and this has now vanished down the toilet and this dispute is costing £50m this year as well as the loss for future years as people change jobs, change routes etc.
I cant help but feel there should be some form of compromise where trains of over say 4 carriages must have a guard unless the guard has called in sick, or held up on a previous service.
Nothing wrong with a nationalised railway per se, however it would need to be at arms length from government. so as that isn't going to happen, the current system (as in don't rock the boat) will have to do for you.
Nope, nobody will be telling you anything of the sort. I don't believe anyone here agrees with a 98% tax rate, Nor agrees a secret ballot shouldn't exist.
Not true. Not only is the railway not a job creation scheme, but removing union membership is more valuable then staff on the railway to the government.
You will be paying the highest fares in Europe or even the world whether guards stay or not. Fares won't be coming down but going up. Please tell me you know this?
The same could be said about you.
I think some companies take the **** and it needs clamping down on too, but the idea that everyone has a massive pay rise begs the question where the cash might come from. Then there's the concept of inflation. There's nothing wrong with responsible Unions, RMT isn't, ASLEF isn't too bad but needs not be more professional.
Protecting YOUR jobs, others have lost theirs.
Last edited:
This "below you", "lower rung on the ladder" stuff has come up a few times. It often seems that some drivers like to imagine that they're just a plucky working class lad carting around a bunch of bankers and hedge fund managers. Actually I suspect drivers are in at least the top half if not the top quartile of the income distribution on their trains. This strike hurts baristas as much as it hurts barristers.
Last edited:
You've said this a few times before but that's not how it works! If all jobs paid at the rate of a train Guard, then you'd actually get inflation and the actual salary would then not be worth as much as it was before that accelerated inflation occurred. However I fail to see what your argument has to do with the actual issue of DOO?
I don't think that the salary of the on-board manager roles at GTR are that terrible? There are many jobs that pay far less.
Of course people are going to be unhappy at any reduction in pay, and of course those affected should have our sympathy, and I wouldn't wish that on anyone (but it happens to many of us; it's happened to me!), but exaggerations like this are not helpful.
tsr
Established Member
The one thing that is likely not to be troubling Onboard Supervisors is the pay, at least for now. Figures seem to have varied wherever I've looked, but on the whole I seem to remember that the basic salary is a little more than conductors and some way beyond what Southern's revenue protection staff got. With variations in commission and overtime it may well work out about the same as conductors.
The issue which far more staff seem to be aware of and concerned about is the job security.
The issue which far more staff seem to be aware of and concerned about is the job security.
Robertj21a
On Moderation
- Joined
- 22 Sep 2013
- Messages
- 7,677
You do realise that Southern is, effectively, just a management contract ? - they have to do what is dictated in the contract they agreed.
I've read of at least a dozen people who have had to give up working in London due to this dispute, and that's just those who have bothered to post that fact on Facebook in one particular area. This particularly affects working mothers who cannot reconcile school runs, work and unreliable trains.
tsr
Established Member
I am more than well aware of this, though I was responding to the comment about salary, and comparing it to the concerns of staff in particular. But the effects on all concerned - all the pawns in the game, the staff and the passengers - are nightmarish.
I do agree that the problems faced by commuters which have caused them to lose or give up jobs are exceedingly worrying, and I have no reason to believe that anyone is fabricating or exaggerating these stories to the point that this is diminished. Obviously there will always be rail routes around the country, with very varied levels of service, where a select bunch of passengers will always find something to complain about, as with any other major public service. These people will sometimes threaten to give up their commutes/other use of the network unless things improve. Likewise there will also be people who, for varying reasons, get bored with repetitively commuting and start to look elsewhere or take retirement. But I think the contrast here is the number of different press and social media reports of people who have become so dissatisfied or so unable to get to work that they have actually, in reality, had to give up jobs, despite dearly wishing that they could get there, and being prepared to put up with incredible levels of delay until they have finally cracked. This is awful and I completely appreciate that.
Last edited:
The non jobs are the marketing, PR, delay attribution, management, consultants, outsourcers, ROSCOs and assorted contract lawyers. Not the guards, dispatchers and stewards.
At the end of the day why should I take on liability for drunks and druggies and risk my career because a bunch of Tories, corporates and foreign investors want to leech the system.
AnonymousUser1
Member
- Joined
- 10 Mar 2013
- Messages
- 1,010
a typo; member of train crew
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
this is what the public sector and ex public sector unions consider the organisations that employ their members to be and that the purpose of these organisations is to employ their members and any service delivered is a side effect of this employment.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
that's certainly CWU policy based on their attitude towards RMG casuals and Agency staff in Parcelforce
what grounds are there to think that the RMT and equally 'radical' / deluded would think any different.
- Status