[Closed] Southern Rail strike - who is right?

Southern Electrostars are, of course, equipped for DOO. They have operated as driver only for years on the route to East Grinstead, and have been for some months on other routes.

No they don't. Do you know how I know that? I live in East Grinstead.

Zing!

[i]Twenty-two minutes late, badger ate a junction box at New Malden.[/i]

[img] ?w=620&q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=max&s=957f23cd46e867cae7bc2314355cfb49[/img]

No they don't. Do you know how I know that? I live in East Grinstead.

Apologies, I meant Uckfield, not sure how far they run as DOO, presumably they're not at East Grinstead. Happy to be wrong on that point.

That's not to say there isn't a guard on the train, just how they operate. Same with all the Arun Valley trains now - DOO south of 3 Bridges

[i]Seventeen minutes late, water seeping through the cables at Effingham Junction - there was a lot of Effingham and a good deal of Blindingham![/i]

[img] [/img]

Southern Rail strike - who is right?

Ask Nigel Farage, then adopt the polar opposite viewpoint. Usually does the trick.

This is what a DOO driver gets to see in his display. Now imagine monitoring 500+ passengers using 24 sets of doors through that display knowing that the ORR and Crown prosecution service are to pin manslaughter upon you if you get it wrong.

[img] [/img]

And if you aren't lucky enough to have an on board display....you get this.

[img] [/img]

It's far far better to have a guard physically stood on the platform to observe the door closing procedure.
DOO was brought into service at a time when the railways were in terminal decline. They weren't running 12 car units with 1000+ people on them.

ASLEF are more than happy to discuss an agreement like Scotrail introduced whereby the driver opens the doors and the guards closes them. This could have been settled a long time ago..

Hmm just back to this.

Bikebuoy, good trolling.

Apologies, I meant Uckfield, not sure how far they run as DOO, presumably they're not at East Grinstead. Happy to be wrong on that point.

Furry muff, no worries. I can't really comment on the Uckfield line: Although my Parents live there, I've only ever used that line once, after last years company xmas lunch, and I was rather drunk, so I can remember much detail

It's far far better to have a guard physically stood on the platform to observe the door closing procedure.
DOO was brought into service at a time when the railways were in terminal decline. They weren't running 12 car units with 1000+ people on them.

In which case why strike on Southern Trains only? The problem is with the ORR who are allowing dangerous practices, not with one specific rail firm. Problems with DOO are not specific to Southern.

And why is the only body making this case a body who happen to have a strong alternative reason to prevent automation. Quite a coincidence.

Occams razors says the rail firms want DOO to reduce headcount and the Unions are opposing it to prevent a reduction in headcount.

Have you sent those photos to the ORR? What did they say about them?

A nice little summary of the other issue the RMT has

Southern has become the critical battleground in a war over how trains are staffed in future.
Aslef and the RMT union joined forces in November 2015 to draw a line in the sand. No more DOO.
Bear in mind, if these changes go through the RMT will have less power to stop trains if it calls strikes in future. Because services will be able to run without one of their conductors on board.
Whatever happens here will be reflected in future franchises as they take delivery of new DOO trains. I believe Northern is next

The ORR say

In a newly published letter to Louise Ellman, the chair of the Transport Select Committee, written after he appeared before the committee on 14 November, Prosser said he “would like to reiterate” that the ORR believes DOO can be operated safely.
He added that, as with all methods of train dispatch, [b]“suitably maintained equipment, proper procedures and competent, trained staff” must be in place.[/b]

And the RSSB say

The director of system safety at the RSSB, Dr George Bearfield, has defended the organisation’s decision to rate driver-only operated (DOO) services as safe to the Transport Select Committee.
Louise Ellman MP, the head of the committee, repeatedly asked Bearfield if the fact that he had said that the operators will have to do a risk assessment of DOO meant it wasn’t completely safe.
But Bearfield said that the risk assessment was a “legal requirement” and “a responsibility that sits with the duty holder companies”.
“As far as we’re concerned, DOO is safe,” he added.

But earlier said

MPs also asked him why the RSSB had said in a March 2015 report that DOO was “only safety neutral if a range of mitigations were implemented” before issuing a recommendation, rather than a report, this year describing it as safe.
“I don’t think the statements are inconsistent,” Bearfield replied.

They are, at best, inconsistent.

repeatedly asked Bearfield if the fact that he had said that the operators will have to do a risk assessment of DOO meant it wasn’t completely safe.

And another day of guards sitting on thier fat arses eating toast whilst the rest of society gets in with doing a job.

Tosserz

I would assume the "mitigation" point is a suggestion that not all existing systems can remain unchanged while maintaining the same level of risk.

E.g. you couldn't take some older rolling stock with no door cameras and run it on a line with curved platforms without installing door cameras.

When you change something in most business environments it's perfectly normal to have to invest in some hardware or procedural change at the same time for the long term benefits to be realised.

The impact on the 300,000 (think that was the figure a few pages back) who use Southern every day (or don't) and the knock on effect on those who don't but are still impacted by business and travel disruption seems very disproportionate.

What is missing (and ought to be available) is a binding court or arbitration process where both sides can present expert evidence and reasoned legal and commercial arguments and a judgement is handed down complete with an appeals process. This is the way virtually all other commercial disputes are settled when there is deadlock. Why should this type of dispute be different and able to have knock on effects on paying customers and taxpayers?

Here you would get safety experts on both sides who could report on the nature of the stations served, the adequacy of the CCTV and "mitigations" for different routes and rolling stock, any special considerations around passenger risk for certain routes or services, the quality of the risk assessments, relevant comparisons with other TOCs etc.

I have no idea who is "right" on the arguments here but I do feel that punishing those with no say in the dispute is morally wrong.

[i]Twenty two minutes late, escaped puma, Chessington North[/i]

[img] [/img]

And another day of guards sitting on thier fat arses eating toast whilst the rest of society gets in with doing a job.

Tosserz

[img] [/img]

Good point Binners.
Staying with the Perrin theme,
I think we've established that the only people against this glorious step forward are:
Wreckers of law and order. Communists, Maoists, Trotskyists, neo-Trotskyists, crypto-Trotskyists, union leaders, Communist union leaders, atheists, agnostics, long-haired weirdos, short-haired weirdos, vandals, hooligans, football supporters, namby-pamby probation officers, rapists, papists, papist rapists, foreign surgeons - headshrinkers, who ought to be locked up, Wedgwood Benn, keg bitter, punk rock, glue-sniffers, "Play For Today", Clive Jenkins, Roy Jenkins, Up Jenkins, up everybody's, Chinese restaurants - why do you think Windsor Castle is ringed with Chinese restaurants?

😆

I think thats what bikebouy was trying to say

E.g. you couldn't take some older rolling stock with no door cameras and run it on a line with curved platforms without installing door cameras

Whilst that's a valid point network-wide it's not valid here, the trains that operate the vast majority of Southern services are so equipped.

Not just the guards striking today though BB, it's the drivers AND the guards.

[img] [/img]

Careful lads, lets not wake the guards up out of thier slumber.

Right On, Right Up da Workaz

Have you not got the troops in yet?

[img] [/img]

Careful lads, lets not wake the guards up out of thier slumber.

Right On, Right Up da Workaz

Haven't you got a train to catch?

So to me, it seems that today, Southern want to take away the responsibility of 'pressing the button' from the guards.

Is this worth striking over, on its own - No.

However, I think this is seen as a step towards rail companies eroding the role & responsibilities of manual staff and that from the unions perspective they have to draw the line somewhere and make a point of "who controls who" at some point and so they have chosen this point. Its highly visible and a mighty pain in the a**e and so there is an incentive to resolve it from all sides. This is the same as the tube unions have been doing for years.

I don't particularly [i]blame[/i] the Unions. They are doing what they do & quite frankly they don't give a **** about anyone else. I do believe that their time is limited and that these roles will be automated at some point but not without a fight and probably not until we are the laughing stock of the world for having the most antiquated public transport system in the modern world.

Do the rail companies want to get rid of the guards on the trains eventually? probably. I don't think we can [i]blame[/i] them either. They are under pressure to reduce fairs and increase efficiency too.

I certainly don't think nationalised industry is the way to go. The incentives are all wrong if you want a decent efficient service. That said. the current model is not right either.

The solution?? Not sure.

I do feel sorry for my fellow commuters stuffed in the middle of this turdfest of a battleground though. Good luck guys.

I do believe that their time is limited and that these roles will be automated at some point but not without a fight and probably not until we are the laughing stock of the world for having the most antiquated public transport system in the modern world.

Oh we're aiming far far higher than that. We shall accept nothing less than the most antiquated, inefficient, and expensive public transport system in the modern or.... **** it..... even the third world.

And by the christ, we're nearly there! But the shareholders are laughing their tits off so its all [b]BRILLIAAAAAANT!!!!![/b]

[img] [/img]

Pretty sure no one is laughing their tits off at the moment - except maybe the few at the Unions enjoying the power play.

Have you not got the troops in yet?

If only we hadn't disbanded 79 railway squadron RCT...

I believe we got rid of the territorial army railway unit too

Pretty sure no one is laughing their tits off at the moment

Well the guys at Southern are still getting paid to provide a service, while delivering something thats a laughable parody of one, all while the taxpayer picks up the tab (again), so I reckon they'll be allowing themselves at least a slight guffaw

Cheers!

Do the rail companies want to get rid of the guards on the trains eventually? probably. I don't think we can blame them either. They are under pressure to reduce fairs and increase efficiency too.

while trying not to get sidetracked too much, we're obsessed by a system that has created the mantra of "maximising profits and reducing costs" This is short hand/code for make sure the shareholders and owners get richer and richer at the expense of every-one else. we've become almost hypnotised into becoming the turkeys that vote for Xmas. This is NOT what this dispute is about though

The Unions are saying (quite rightly in my opinion) there is a safety issue on [i]these types of trains[/i] operating as Driver only (comparing the trains that Southern operate to the Docklands Light Railway is a red herring) and that the offer to retain guards as train managers really only lasts the lifetime of this franchise (as once they aren't guards they can be made redundant by the next franchise operators).

Unions, always ****ing things up by trying to look after the interests of their members, while at the same time daring to prioritise safety over profit, the bastards

We've had 20 years of a rail service, sold too cheaply to the private sector, asset stripped of land, buildings etc for profit, shareholder dividends, a doubling in the size of subsidy from the taxpayer, massive increases in fares over this period, and a service that can barely handle the increase in users, too little investment in the infrastructure which we were told that the main reason for privatisation was to access private capital, only the organisation(railtrack) turned out to be utter sh*t,back under Government control who now want to privatise it again.

I mean, who in their right mind would do this sort of thing again? Oh, hang on, Royal mail, sold too cheaply, with the main reason for privatisation was to access private capital, shareholder dividends taking £600 million out of it in three years, cuts to services...

And you people complain about unions?

Who is the enemy again?

The solution??

Ultimately, the solution is to find other jobs for the people displaced by this step towards automation. People who once did jobs like sticking labels on jam jars were made redundant by machines, and had to find work as sysadmins etc. We need to re-employ the guards in a useful way. Apparently we have a lack of carers for dementia sufferers, so maybe that is an obvious direction to look, given the guards' experience in dealing with the problems of commuters?

Who is right? the Germans with their co operative approach to industrial relations rather than the adversarial approach we have here.

Who is right? the Germans with their co operative approach to industrial relations rather than the adversarial approach we have here.

Well, Theresa May has promised to insist on workers' reps on the board.

Oh, hang on a mo....

How about the Scandies?

You can't replace trains with them, silly!

[img] [/img]

Erm... actually.....

And you lot of selfish strikers have been joined by another bunch of tosserz at Heathrow.

#1970'sbritaininthe21stcentury

[b]Join the revolution comrade!!!!![/b]

[img] [/img]

Don't worry, bikebuoy, there's more to come

[img] [/img]

#1930'sbritaininthe21stcentury

Who is right? the Germans with their co operative approach to industrial relations rather than the adversarial approach we have here.

Just as well we have Brexit to keep us safe from such forward thinking.

Personally, I think our unions are as much an obstacle to cooperative relations as the businesses themselves. There is a role for unions in our society, it just isn't the role they are currently doing.

In this instance, I think that there are legitimate safety concerns due to the driver's visibility (or lack thereof). Southern could address these, but aren't doing so. The union could also work towards a good DOO solution, but would rather keep our railways in a mess.

I rather fancy binding pendulum arbitration to settle industrial disputes. It might stop everybody being quite so bloody minded about things.

grumpy - I would tend to agree. Its the them and us mentality that annoys. Unions have to try to defend the workers - that what they are there for an with the law as it is the cards are stacked in the employers favour. A lot of employers ( as it would appear in this case) forget that satisfied workers give good service so keeping the workforce happy is good for your business.

Under the german model there is much more incentive to settle disputes by agreement not by grinding the other side down as both sides have a stake in the business and this is obvious. Strikes usually have no winners but what else could the unions do here? Its obvious that the aim of the employers is to reduce costs by downgrading roles reducing workforce and the employers have also been intransigent.

I think the safety aspect may well have been overplayed by the unions but equally its a perfectly valid argument.

Personally, I think our unions are as much an obstacle to cooperative relations as the businesses themselves.

what's the old adage...You get the Union you deserve..?

It is the last gasp of old-time unionism.

The word I heard from someone in the industry is that the RMT don't want to lose at least some of their members having "safety-critical" jobs which can be used as a strike tool.

The TV screens are in the cabs already, lots of operators do Drivers shutting the doors. Southern is a particurly bad franchise, worse than SE or SW - and I use all three regularly, but this time this one is fair and square on the RMT.

Binners is having a field day on this thread.....pictures of Farage, Wolfy and Corbyn in swift succession! 😮

Someone in the industry? a member of management no doubt who want those pesky unions crushed so they can make greater profits?

At least, this is one where we are all in it together - in addition to the cancellations, its the tax payers that bear the burden of lost revenue here. Still cheap in the context of comradeship.

how about we just sell off all SR trains to other countries that need them/can run them effectively.
replace the tracks with large cycleways spanning the entire South.
i hate using the trains.
i hate using buses.
whenever i use my bike, i get to where i am going and enjoy the journey - [u]and i get there on time[/u]. regardless of the weather.
this also solves the issue of 'sharing' the roads with the c**ty cagers.
why we need to dance around debating who's right and wrong when really we just need to strip it all down to something a lot more simple and manageable.

plus i want an excuse to get myself a nice tourer bike.

The word I heard from someone in the industry is........

An anonymous person quotes [i]"someone"[/i]

Who can argue with that ?

Welcome back Ernie - there is a very bland thread that needs you. How is your old mate getting on, not too down about the crap ratings I hope?

Good point Binners.
Staying with the Perrin theme,
I think we've established that the only people against this glorious step forward are:
Wreckers of law and order. Communists, Maoists, Trotskyists, neo-Trotskyists, crypto-Trotskyists, union leaders, Communist union leaders, atheists, agnostics, long-haired weirdos, short-haired weirdos, vandals, hooligans, football supporters, namby-pamby probation officers, rapists, papists, papist rapists, foreign surgeons - headshrinkers, who ought to be locked up, Wedgwood Benn, keg bitter, punk rock, glue-sniffers, "Play For Today", Clive Jenkins, Roy Jenkins, Up Jenkins, up everybody's, Chinese restaurants - why do you think Windsor Castle is ringed with Chinese restaurants?

you are Tom Robinson and I claim my £5 !

😉

teamhurtmore - Member
Welcome back Ernie - there is a very bland thread that needs you.

TJ and Ernie - Someone with no connection to any train operators in the South - who was watching with wry amusement and no financial or self-interest at all.

Here? - semi-amused/interested observer Rusty. But relieved that I no longer have to use Southern from CJ to V'toria. That was bad enough and only about 10 mins long.

I was looking forward to Ernie's inside knowledge about Jezza actually. He knows more than the rest of us there.

Stoatsbrother - Member

The TV screens are in the cabs already, lots of operators do Drivers shutting the doors.

This is the bit that confuses me, how do the screens work? For a 12 car train (not unusual on southern) are there 24 screens? Or does the driver have to flick through screens for each door, in which case the drift times at stations will increase by a lot!

Fairy snuff stoatsbrother. A senior manager tho?

Ernie - where you been hiding? Nice to see you back

Wahaaaay. The Croydon Communist is back! Welcome back amongst us comrade 😀

[img] [/img]

I imagine the screens work about as well as a bloke squinting down the length of the train, it's not like the guards walk the length of the platform checking each door is clear before closing it.

I would have thought an automated system that won't let the train move off if any of the doors are obstructed or not closed is safer than relying on a falable human. Seems to work for lifts.

It looks like the people are in ... Carry On At Your Convenience ... 😛

I would have thought an automated system that won't let the train move off if any of the doors are obstructed or not closed is safer than relying on a falable human. Seems to work for lifts.

Major issue there is that the trains are regularly overcrowded so would often have someone blocking the door which would make the trains even later, especially if you've made the person responsible and able to make sure that doesn't happen redundant.

I can't help thinking in these days of "health and safety gone mad", current H&S at work legislation (you know the legislation that has criminal penalties including prison for directors) and litigation culture that a TOC carrying 300,000 passengers a day might just have done a proper risk assessment of this change.

I come back to my earlier suggestion that what's needed in this kind of dispute is a court (or other body of appropriate jurisdiction) that can properly assess two correctly pleaded points of view with expert evidence that is cross examined. This is where I think the future role of the unions could be. They will be the bodies who can assemble and coordinate the evidence for the "workers" funded by subs as now. A less destructive, more independent process and it doesn't involve distress and major inconvenience to the general public.

As for the profit and shareholder bashing just a quick reminder that the majority shareholders in most big businesses are in fact ordinary working people's pension companies and savings companies (eg share ISAs). The generation of profit also feeds the tax system (perhaps with a few exceptions) and that pays for public services. So whether you're in a private or public sector scheme or just getting state pension you need those profits to be made (unless we are going for the communism model?).

Shuhhhhhhhhhhsh.

They're all asleep, tucked up under thier protective wing of the Union. Wake them up now and they'll not turn up for work in the morning..

😆

Unlike us lot, who have to struggle to get in.

Tosserz

I would have thought an automated system that won't let the train move off if any of the doors are obstructed or not closed is safer than relying on a falable human. Seems to work for lifts.

quite a few trap and drag accidents still happen on trains.

I come back to my earlier suggestion that what's needed in this kind of dispute is a court (or other body of appropriate jurisdiction) that can properly assess two correctly pleaded points of view with expert evidence that is cross examined. This is where I think the future role of the unions could be. They will be the bodies who can assemble and coordinate the evidence for the "workers" funded by subs as now. A less destructive, more independent process and it doesn't involve distress and major inconvenience to the general public.

i refer you back to the death of a young lady who fell betwen a train and platform at james street station liverpool raib report and ORR reports

Do RMT affiliated drivers currently operate any driver only trains?

tut, tut 😉

A simple question... If you're in a train crash, would you rather there was a guard on the train?

CaptainFlashheart - Member

Do RMT affiliated drivers currently operate any driver only trains?

Almost certainly, but so what?

Extensive travel around the world, and I can say that conductors are a thing of the past. OK they still have them on some trains in India (Hyderabad to Bhadrachalam overnight anyone?), but then this train also has a hole in the floor to poo through, so I think they are still holding onto Victorian ways of doing things.

Northwind - Member
A simple question... If you're in a train crash, would you rather there was a guard on the train?

In the train collision in the severn tunnel in 1991,the driver of the second train was trapped in his cab, the driver of the first train didnt know he had been crashed into,as he phoned to report a posible derailment and the guard of the second train was also injured it took many hours to get injured passengers out of the 4 mile tunnel with no internal lighting, just the train emergency lighting, who wouldnt want more railway trained safety staff then.

Bring back the old slam door trains and we'll close the doors ourselves. Nothing more to argue about then.

Unlike us lot, who have to struggle to get in.
Tosserz

Poor baby.

The 1991 Severn crash was caused by Driver error IIRC. So I that's an argument *for* automated trains.

outofbreath - Member
The 1991 Severn crash was caused by Driver error IIRC. So I that's an argument *for* automated trains.

I come back to my earlier suggestion that what's needed in this kind of dispute is a court

I am constantly surprised by how readily people are to give up their rights.

DrJ - Member

I come back to my earlier suggestion that what's needed in this kind of dispute is a court

I am constantly surprised by how readily people are to give up their rights.

Bear in mind, if these changes go through the RMT will have less power to stop trains if it calls strikes in future. Because services will be able to run without one of their conductors on board.

I'd rather there were several, but given the likelihood that the only other railway company operative might be incapacitated in the event of a crash, one additional should be the minimum.

The RMT have already accepted a compromise that has drivers opening doors (Scotrail)

Of course the rail companies can re-purpose the guards elsewhere, but these jobs are finite: One guard I spoke to said they were offered the option to apply for certain alternative positions within Southern, but the position to applicant ratio was something like 1:100.

People still need a place to work and restricting their earning opportunities just breeds resentment if a viable alternative isn't put in place.

Look at the coal mines: The biggest mistake there wasn't closing the mines, that had to happen, sooner or later; the biggest mistake was not making suitable provision for those kicked out of their jobs.

outofbreath - Member

The 1991 Severn crash was caused by Driver error IIRC. So I that's an argument *for* automated trains.

TBH if the tech were there I'd be happy with driverless trains, as long as there were still guards.

Look at the coal mines: The biggest mistake there wasn't closing the mines, that had to happen, sooner or later; the biggest mistake was not making suitable provision for those kicked out of their jobs.

In this case the union needs to be honest about what they are fighting for and see if the public support them. Strikes will not solve this one without public support.

In reality this one goes all the way back to education and equipping people for a vastly different world that exists now. 30 years ago my family farm employed up to 8 men to manage about 300 acres, now my Dad, uncle and 1 other do the majority of work on nearly 1,400 acres. time change and people need to be prepared to change too.

I come back to my earlier suggestion that what's needed in this kind of dispute is a court

I am constantly surprised by how readily people are to give up their rights.

Going to court is not giving up your rights. It is actually a really important right in itself.

It's asking someone impartial and experienced in managing disputes and conflicting viewpoints in the context of the law to resolve the position of two parties who can't agree.

This is exactly what the court system is for (see divorce, debt collection, patent disputes, land disputes, all sorts of employment disputes, health and safety prosecutions, ...ad nauseum). If you live in the UK you are already subject to the rule of its court system because it is part of the system of civil and criminal law in the country in which you live.

One of the great privileges of civilised society is the ability to access an impartial court system that allows disputes to be resolved without violence or bloodshed.

i refer you back to the death of a young lady who fell betwen a train and platform at james street station liverpool raib report and ORR reports

But this is not relevant to HOW you resolve the stand off. If anything it underlines the importance of not turning this into a "who folds first" competition and getting someone who doesn't have a vested interest in the outcome to make that decision.

It is of course relevant in terms of the arguments that could be presented (i.e. it may form part of the pro guard argument) but the whole point is neither side is giving an inch so someone who doesn't have any other motive than the correct outcome should examine the evidence and draw the conclusion.

CFH - yes. Modern trains with integrated safety systems. Nowhere do they use the same type of trains driver only that this dispute is about.