Southern DOO: ASLEF members vote 79.1% for revised deal

[AlterEgo]

Going on strike because of the decision of a jury or a prosecutor is the height of arrogance.

The judiciary and justice system is independent and impartial, and always will be in a modern democracy.

Strikes are there to resolve differences between the employee base and the employer, not to protest a jury of your peers sentencing another of your peers.

I cannot begin to imagine why anyone would think that going on strike over that hypothetical scenario, would ever be productive.

 

[Bellbell]

What alternative would you suggest for staff who can no longer be certain that following the procedures laid down by their company will protect them?

 

[AlterEgo]

What alternative would you suggest for staff who can no longer be certain that following the procedures laid down by their company will protect them?

1) The union funds an appeal to the member's case, if feasible.
2) The union seeks assurances from the employer about procedures.
3) The union engages in a media or petitioning campaign to free the colleague.
4) The union engages productively with parliament to change the law, if feasible.

I can't ever condone striking over the decision of a jury. That is a fundamental erosion of the independence of the justice system, it'll bugger up people's lives again and you'll get no sympathy off them if you do it.

 

[KTHV]

So, do you mean a strike or work to rule because you don't agree with a decision of the court ?

As opposed to the Tory Government forcing change in Law through Parliament banning strikes on the railway because they don't agree with a decision of the court? (Which I'm sure they'd love to do)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[AlterEgo]

As opposed to the Tory Government forcing change in Law through Parliament banning strikes on the railway because they don't agree with a decision of the court? (Which I'm sure they'd love to do)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Two wrongs don't make a right, do they?

 

[JamesTT]

What alternative would you suggest for staff who can no longer be certain that following the procedures laid down by their company will protect them?

Wasn't the Zee case supposed to be heard last year? Why has the case been delayed?

 

[Bellbell]

1) The union funds an appeal to the member's case, if feasible.
2) The union seeks assurances from the employer about procedures.
3) The union engages in a media or petitioning campaign to free the colleague.
4) The union engages productively with parliament to change the law, if feasible.

I can't ever condone striking over the decision of a jury. That is a fundamental erosion of the independence of the justice system, it'll bugger up people's lives again and you'll get no sympathy off them if you do it.

And while that's happening everyone just carries on and crosses their fingers nothing else happens?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Wasn't the Zee case supposed to be heard last year? Why has the case been delayed?

I don't know why, but it was postponed to March this year.

 

[Legzr1]

1) The union funds an appeal to the member's case, if feasible.
2) The union seeks assurances from the employer about procedures.
3) The union engages in a media or petitioning campaign to free the colleague.
4) The union engages productively with parliament to change the law, if feasible.

I can't ever condone striking over the decision of a jury. That is a fundamental erosion of the independence of the justice system, it'll bugger up people's lives again and you'll get no sympathy off them if you do it.

You're a driver and my 'hypothetical' becomes reality.

How would you feel doing the job whilst waiting weeks, months or years for a judicial review to go through the courts?

Any possible industrial action wouldn't be because of a Jury's decision - it would be because of failings in management.

 

[Juniper Driver]

Indeed.

There does seem to be something about the rail industry and the driving grade in particular which means everyone has an opinion on how easy the job is etc. Even with no experience of actually doing said job.

I doubt anyone would make the same comments about firefighters/nurses/doctors/pilots or indeed any other type of job. People would also probably accept what experienced fireman/nurses/pilots/whoever had to say about the responsibilities and difficulties involved with doing their jobs. Why is this not the case with train drivers?

Maybe it's because people use trains so frequently that they become blase about their operation.

I blame the gutter press for this and to some people the rubbish they print is like the gospel truth of someone else's opinion of what's feasible and what's not when it comes to railway excuses and other railway related stuff.The public fall for this media crap time and time again...How many times have we read about leaves on the line like it's a ridiculous excuse?

They seem to ridicule the railway every excuse they get and don't seem to realise running a railway is more complicated than they think.For many different factors.

We are looked at like glorified bus drivers now and that's about it.
I have nothing against bus drivers and think they do a great job.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_wrong_type_of_snow

You may like this.This is how gullible people are to the press.

When this "excuse" came out I knew from the first second what this guy was talking about.It isn't rocket science.

 

[whoosh]

There's been various links posted on here comparing drivers wages to places like Germany etc , if you've evidence that those figures supplied were largely incorrect and UK drivers don't really earn significantly more than much of Europe, I'll happily withdraw the criticism

Not Europe, but here is the rate of pay back in 2010 (seven years ago) for Train Drivers (known as Engineers in the United States) at suburban railway PATH (Port Authority Trans-Hudson). $37.28 per hour is £30.94 at today's Google conversion figure of one dollar being equal to 83 pence.

Note also 'time and a half' for overtime (better than flat rate for a lot of TOCs in the UK).

 

[Legzr1]

I blame the gutter press for this and to some people the rubbish they print is like the gospel truth of someone else's opinion of what's feasible and what's not when it comes to railway excuses and other railway related stuff.The public fall for this media crap time and time again...How many times have we read about leaves on the line like it's a ridiculous excuse?

We are looked at like glorified bus drivers now and that's about it.
I have nothing against bus drivers and think they do a great job.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_wrong_type_of_snow

You may like this.This is how gullible people are to the press.

When this "excuse" came out I knew from the first second what this guy was talking about.It isn't rocket science.

Agreed.

Propaganda, pure and simple.

 

[Juniper Driver]

Agreed.

Propaganda, pure and simple.

Thanks mate.Never expected anyone to agree with my "rant".I'm a bit cheesed off on "Blue Monday".

 

[AlterEgo]

You're a driver and my 'hypothetical' becomes reality.

How would you feel doing the job whilst waiting weeks, months or years for a judicial review to go through the courts?

Any possible industrial action wouldn't be because of a Jury's decision - it would be because of failings in management.

It isn't about how I *feel*, it's what I *think* would be productive.

Start at the end goal, and think about how you might get there. Don't just strike and then hope for the best. Striking can sometimes be very effective. However, your industry is politically cornered and suffers from a (somewhat unjustified) image problem, and striking is not likely to be productive.

 

[infobleep]

Going on strike because of the decision of a jury or a prosecutor is the height of arrogance.

The judiciary and justice system is independent and impartial, and always will be in a modern democracy.

Strikes are there to resolve differences between the employee base and the employer, not to protest a jury of your peers sentencing another of your peers.

I cannot begin to imagine why anyone would think that going on strike over that hypothetical scenario, would ever be productive.

Well then they had better keep striking now and making hot epping the CPS might prosecute a driver if something went wrong even if their employers think they did no wrong.

 

[Legzr1]

It isn't about how I *feel*, it's what I *think* would be productive.

Start at the end goal, and think about how you might get there. Don't just strike and then hope for the best. Striking can sometimes be very effective. However, your industry is politically cornered and suffers from a (somewhat unjustified) image problem, and striking is not likely to be productive.

I disagree with much you've posted in this thread but you don't come across as daft or hard of thinking so please don't avoid my question.

Don't try to over-think or guess what I'm getting at - what would be productive about doing a job, following company procedures to the letter and still being in a position where you'd still end up in prison if an incident occurred?

Try a little empathy and see where we go.

 

[redbutton]

As far as I am aware RMT’s guards strike called for next Monday (23rd) involves:
(1) On Board Supervisors, a role that did not exist a year ago and most of whom were conductors this time last year
(2) Conductors, i.e. those guards still on the same terms and conditions they were a year ago.

Please can someone explain why strike action by conductors is not deemed as secondary action (and thus unlawful) given that:
(1) Southern Rail has completed its DOO roll-out (with around 70% of its services now booked to be DOO operated), thus the terms and conditions for those staff who are still conductors will remain unchanged for the rest of the franchise
(2) At the time the ballot was conducted last year it may not have been 100% clear which of the then conductors would be affected, but now that the process is complete it is known who was affected (i.e. those conductors who are now on board supervisors (or have left)) and who was not (and will not) be affected (i.e. those conductors who are still conductors).
(3) Employees can take lawful industrial action only for a trade dispute, i.e. something that affects their job, contract or terms and conditions. For this particular dispute, this would appear to apply to on board supervisors and drivers, but not to those staff who are still (and thus will remain) conductors.
(4) All secondary action, such as 'sympathy' strikes, (i.e. action which does not immediately relate to the terms, conditions or continued employment of strikers themselves) is unlawful, even if this involves employees of the same employer who are not involved in the primary dispute. Unless I’ve missed something, this would appear to apply to those staff who are still conductors.

The dispute was valid and lawful when the initial ballot was voted, therefore it remains so for the duration of the dispute as long as there is continuous action with no more than a 28-day break as I understand it.

Just because some conductors are remaining in the grade doesn't mean they aren't part of the dispute. They have had changes to rostering and route knowledge, and are no longer safety-critical on many of the trains they continue to work (they "assist", which involves all the same duties except doors.)

The conductors that signed OBS contracts did so under duress to ensure that they would not be considered to have voluntarily resigned, which their lawyers told them may have been the case had they refused. Therefore they remain part of the dispute.

I hear that GTR were as surprised as you are when their lawyers told them that everyone could still strike.

 

[JamesTT]

As far as I know the rule book requirement is for staff dispatching a train to be able to see all doors and the signal/off indicator/ banner repeater. However despatch plans will state where they should be on the platform and in some circumstances which coach. If an incident occurs where a member of staff can see all doors etc. But they have not adhered to the dispatch plan. Is it possible based on the rule book company and union will say no case but another authority will say the member of staff was negligent?

 

[infobleep]

I blame the gutter press for this and to some people the rubbish they print is like the gospel truth of someone else's opinion of what's feasible and what's not when it comes to railway excuses and other railway related stuff.The public fall for this media crap time and time again...How many times have we read about leaves on the line like it's a ridiculous excuse?

They seem to ridicule the railway every excuse they get and don't seem to realise running a railway is more complicated than they think.For many different factors.

We are looked at like glorified bus drivers now and that's about it.
I have nothing against bus drivers and think they do a great job.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_wrong_type_of_snow

You may like this.This is how gullible people are to the press.

When this "excuse" came out I knew from the first second what this guy was talking about.It isn't rocket science.

People often think one's job is easy. Some years ago I was talk with some students, about 2 years or so after leaving university. I realised just how much I'd learnt at work in that short space of time.

Graphic designers think they can draw maps and they do but often they are rubbish because they don't understand the cartographic principles of map making. Whilst I don't claim to be the world's greatest, I do a better job than them because I trained in it.

I would love to see some of these posters on here try to drive a train. I wouldn't want to do it.

Years ago I wanted to be a meteorologists. I spent two weeks at a weather station for work experience. Although the weather may look nice and sound interesting and it is in my opinion, it's extremely difficult unless you have the right sort of brain for it. I soon found out, whilst doing my A Levels, that my brain wasn't wired for the study of the weather.

I can well believe how the UK might have the wrong type of snow. That's not to say TOCs don't get caught out or not do things they should have done.

We are getting better at weather prediction but it isn't easily, which is why the wrong predictions come out.

 

[Phil.]

Not Europe, but here is the rate of pay back in 2010 (seven years ago) for Train Drivers (known as Engineers in the United States) at suburban railway PATH (Port Authority Trans-Hudson). $37.28 per hour is £30.94 at today's Google conversion figure of one dollar being equal to 83 pence.

Note also 'time and a half' for overtime (better than flat rate for a lot of TOCs in the UK).

Figures for earnings don't mean a thing without publishing the cost of living. Earn what a Southern driver does in Malawi and you'd be a near millionaire. Earn the same in Norway and you'd be in near poverty.

 

[O L Leigh]

As a neutral, in the discussion about safety, I find the evidence presented AlterEgo to be definitive and if I was an Inspector at an Inquiry (I have attended many road scheme Inquiries) I would be more convinced by his evidence than the other contributions.

I understand what you're trying to express in your example, but in this particular circumstance you need to know what the reports show no matter what methodology has been used. The stats presented by AlterEgo are extremely limited in scope and vague in their details. While they are interesting and help to shine a little light on the matter it is a little hard to draw any meaningful conclusions from them. We are all inferring rather too much from them with specific regard to despatch when such considerations clearly did not form any part of the statistical analysis.

The doors have two or three (depending on the train type) door safety features. A light barrier and the motor current control (or air pressure control on air driven doors), sometimes a weight sensor on the footstep. The door tries to close automaticly after five seconds when none of these safety features are triggered. The door still can be opened by the passenger pressing the door button though. It's not unusual in off peak hours, that all doors are closed automatically before departure time, the 50 seconds rule doesn't apply in this case.

We are allowed to close/lock the doors when:

• the doors are already closed (light in cab extinct).
• the doors are open, we can oversee the whole lenght of the train and no one is boarding the train.
• after 50 seconds in all other cases.

Closing the door from the cab ("forced closure") switches off the light barrier and the weight sensor and turns on an accoustic and an optical warning. Only the motor current control stays active to detect obstacles in the door. So it is possible for thin objects to get trapped in doors without the system noticing it.

Most modern UK rolling stock has similar safety features on the doors and operate in a similar manner.

I'm just wondering about this 50 second interval thing. Do you allow additional time at busy locations or do those who aren't quick enough to board in that time get left behind?

But the main problem is the distraction of the driver from the signals. There was a significant rise in SPADs (and accidents) after the introduction of DOO due to dispatch duties being carried out by the driver instead of checking the signal aspect. New safety systems and new procedures had to be introduced. It became quite clear, that the driver can't be responsible to check every door of the train by camaras due to the poor quality of the pictures.

Such incidents happened indeed.

And with removing the guard from the dispatch duty, you remove a safety feature of the chain. The swiss RA for example is dependent of the signal aspect and can only be lit, when the signal ahead shows a proceed aspect. There is a real danger in transfering the dispatch duty to the driver.

That's certainly an interesting insight and I'm glad that you've been able to make these points. This is a potentially serious outcome to the direction that UK railway's safety culture is taking and a big worry for drivers. It also highlights that door obstruction detection technology is potentially as unreliable in Europe as it is in the UK.

O L Leigh

 

[Bromley boy]

I blame the gutter press for this and to some people the rubbish they print is like the gospel truth of someone else's opinion of what's feasible and what's not when it comes to railway excuses and other railway related stuff.The public fall for this media crap time and time again...How many times have we read about leaves on the line like it's a ridiculous excuse?

They seem to ridicule the railway every excuse they get and don't seem to realise running a railway is more complicated than they think.For many different factors.

We are looked at like glorified bus drivers now and that's about it.
I have nothing against bus drivers and think they do a great job.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_wrong_type_of_snow

You may like this.This is how gullible people are to the press.

When this "excuse" came out I knew from the first second what this guy was talking about.It isn't rocket science.

That's interesting, I had no idea the "wrong type of snow" phrase could be linked back to a particular event.

But yes I agree, it's often a case of ignorant journalists wanting to sell papers to gullible commuters who love any excuse to kick the railway anyway. They hate it because they use it to get to work and it costs them a lot of money.

We had an equally stupid headline about "the wrong type of sunlight" around this area a couple of years back. What was happening was that the low winter sun was shining directly into cameras so DOO monitors were unusable at various times of the day. The TOC tweeted the reason and of course it was picked up by the gutter press.

It may sound trivial and like a silly excuse but, as this thread has proved, could have extremely serious consequences! In fact it has caused delays again this year but the TOC have wised up and it's being explained away as "operational issues" or similar.

 

[Juniper Driver]

That's interesting, I had no idea the "wrong type of snow" phrase could be linked back to a particular event.

But yes I agree, it's often a case of ignorant journalists wanting to sell papers to gullible commuters who love any excuse to kick the railway anyway. They hate it because they use it to get to work and it costs them a lot of money.

We had an equally stupid headline about "the wrong type of sunlight" around this area a couple of years back. What was happening was that the low winter sun was shining directly into cameras so DOO monitors were unusable at various times of the day. The TOC tweeted the reason and of course it was picked up by the gutter press.

It may sound trivial and like a silly excuse but, as this thread has proved, could have extremely serious consequences! In fact it has caused delays again this year but the TOC have wised up and it's being explained away as "operational issues" or similar.

Wrong type of sunlight originates from the 1991 event because the press think they are funny and original and this brainwashes the commuters into thinking it's (yet) another stupid excuse when it isn't.

It's dangerous and not good because all it does is enrage the commuters when something goes wrong yet again...and we know who gets the brunt of it.The Guard and station staff.

 

[SA_900]

The message you have entered is too short. Please lengthen your message to at least 5 characters.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If the DOO cameras are of poor quality, is a partial answer not simply to replace them with better quality ones? Including infra-red for use at night? You can do a very good quality camera in a small form factor these days.

 

[Deepgreen]

If the DOO cameras are of poor quality, is a partial answer not simply to replace them with better quality ones? Including infra-red for use at night? You can do a very good quality camera in a small form factor these days.

Lighting standards are such that infra-red should not be required, and its use may produce confusing/ambiguous images.

What does this phrase mean?

 

[Bletchleyite]

What does this phrase mean?

Taking not much space, and therefore would easily fit in the housings on such stock.

Example: A digital SLR is not small form-factor (it is not designed primarily to be small, it is designed primarily for functionality). The camera in an iPhone is (it is designed for the functionality that can be achieved with the primary aim of being small).

 

[ComUtoR]

As far as I know the rule book requirement is for staff dispatching a train to be able to see all doors and the signal/off indicator/ banner repeater. However despatch plans will state where they should be on the platform and in some circumstances which coach. If an incident occurs where a member of staff can see all doors etc. But they have not adhered to the dispatch plan. Is it possible based on the rule book company and union will say no case but another authority will say the member of staff was negligent?

The staff member would be negligent.

The TOC must have various policies and procedures in place to ensure that the rule book and every other standard is maintained and adhered to. Both company and union would say the staff member was negligent.

The big grey thing with large ears, sitting in the corner is asking what happens when ALL policy and procedure is in place will staff be prosecuted ? Where does liability begin and end ?

There was a thread a while back regarding a SPAD and how it was Health and Safety law that was leading to prosecution and this very thread raises the issue of Disability laws and the responsibility of the staff members.

Many of us are really concerned about what will happen should the CPS win the case. If you follow rules and procedures laid out by your company then you should be without liability and if things do go wrong then liability and root cause goes down to procedure. If you choose to use the ramp (for example) to aid a disabled passenger because you can be prosecuted under disability law and then something goes wrong. You WILL be liable and very negligent for failing to adhere to procedure. Its a catch 22.

 

[bahnause]

I'm just wondering about this 50 second interval thing. Do you allow additional time at busy locations or do those who aren't quick enough to board in that time get left behind?

According to the rule book there is no additional time. But we do use common sense... There's no guarantee that no one is left behind though.

That's certainly an interesting insight and I'm glad that you've been able to make these points. This is a potentially serious outcome to the direction that UK railway's safety culture is taking and a big worry for drivers. It also highlights that door obstruction detection technology is potentially as unreliable in Europe as it is in the UK.

I wouldn't say it's unreliable. There is a always remaining risk. It becomes more and more a problem with passengers thinking the warning lights and sounds are an invitation to jump into the train ignoring the already closing doors, instead of stepping back and waiting for the next train. But it seems as everything has to be 100% foolproof these days.

 

[Bromley boy]

Don't think many of these complaints are illegitimate. Essentially arguments for having more resilient infrastructure. And understandable given impact of delays.

This is partially true, but the press doesn't help by trivialising very real operational problems. Cheap headlines about "leaves on the line" overlook the reality of leaf fall which is an inherent problem with running a steel wheel on a steel rail. Network Rail spends goodness knows how many millions each year on foliage clearance and leaf-buster trains to reduce the impact but it will still cause delays.

These types of headlines have created a culture where people generally accept that if it's too windy an aeroplane can't take off, but are unwilling to accept that leaf fall is a legitimate cause of delays on the railway.

One solution to the problem of sunlight affecting monitors is placing platform dispatchers with bats and flags at strategic locations. This of course becomes very expensive.

 

[physics34]

Taking not much space, and therefore would easily fit in the housings on such stock.

Example: A digital SLR is not small form-factor (it is not designed primarily to be small, it is designed primarily for functionality). The camera in an iPhone is (it is designed for the functionality that can be achieved with the primary aim of being small).

the odd thing is, when you have a 377/6 leading a 377/3 for example....... the images in the cab of that 3 car are nearly as good as the imagies for the 5 car...... but the other way round all images are pretty poor from the 3 car cab.


This suggests it isnt necessarily the cameras and that it could be the wiring, feeds or monitors that might be the issue.