Great Western Coffee Shop

Apparenty today is the date of the latest ballot...
http://uk.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUKL2123035420071221?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews

There was talk of walkouts on 14th and 17th of Jan.  Anybody know if this is still the plan ? 

Strike action IS happening, there was an overwhelming majority of votes in favour of it. (from what i just heard on the radio)

Oh, and those are the BAA dates in that article, not the fgw ones

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/7180888.stm confirms decision too.
 :-[

Just tell me who to send my bill to for a lost days revenue...

Sorry, as said before, I have no time for strike action and I do not agree with it - especially not for the reasons mentioned on here before christmas

So your own safety is not a concern when under trained manager are operating trains?

And yeah, goodluck getting anything for a "lost days revenue". You've been given notice of it, and will be expected to find alternative arrangements. You won't get a penny from FGW.

I sugest you make your way into birmingham, and take a virgin service into work

Which will cost me a fortune so I may as well just stay home

I know I wont get a penny - I was being sarcastic

As I always say - if you dont like the job and the conditions - go find a different one

It's FGW that are breaching their "conditions", not drivers and guards, it's over YOUR safety that these strikes are being carried out, where competence assesors who aren't actually passed out as guards OR drivers are working trains, if your train derailed you would expect a competent person to take charge of your safety.

More articles on this (links below.)
http://www.maidenhead-advertiser.co.uk/news_article.php?section=5&category=89&story=5275

http://www.maidenhead-advertiser.co.uk/news_article.php?section=5&category=89&story=5287

Quote from FGW :


The RMT and FGW are set to meet again tomorrow at noon.

It has recently been confirmed by the RMT that they will call strikes by FGW guards on the 20th January.

FGW's reaction to the announcement of the RMT's ballot:

http://www.firstgreatwestern.co.uk/NewsItem.aspx?id=577

Whilst I sure hope that agreement is reached and Strike action called off, it should be remembered that NOBODY on the Railway WINS when strikes occur, the Road Lobby WINS.

I'm not a big surporter of Unions, but whilst BR was a fair employer, there were a few strikes but the whole Railway industry worked for a common goal.
In my Job if I ****ed up, and Trains got Cancelled it was my boss would come and see me, He'd get to the root Cause, he would then have to see the top Knobs and square things up, he would then come back to me the next day with, "It's all been sorted, DON'T EVER DO THAT AGAIN, for that you owe me a PINT", and that was fair really.

Today it's a BLAME CULTURE and ANYBODY on the railway screwing things up and they are out the door, even if they had great skills in the job, for this Blame Culture it's now essential for ALL railway workers to be in a Union.

Whilst FGW Quote "they only used a manager to work a train" this is Manament by "BULLING" and I BET the manager so used was not at all happy about being ordered to work the train.
First group show their true colours in America where due to the lack of union laws, (that Britain enjoys), the use of Non union labour in the States is almost a condition of First group service.

The TOC's will always argue that Safety First, yet given just 1/2 a chance, every train would work DOO (Driver Only Operation), in my working enviroment it's now more often Profit first Safety second, that is the reason a Manager worked a train.
It truely JUSTIFIED for the unions to call a strike.

At least one manager from the Westcountry actually refused to work a train when asked, despite being told by his boss "do it or face the consequences", good on him because he still refused to work the train as a matter of morals!!

Here is the view from the I Hate First Great Western blog (link below.)
http://ihatefirstgreatwestern.blogspot.com/2008/01/can-we-strike-too-please.html

Very well said I thought!

ihategreatwestern have got it RIGHT!

Totally agree with you Vacman!

Well my initial thought was....so how often do trains get derailed then ?  Was amazed (bl**dy disturbed actually!) that for Network Rail controlled areas, the average is between 32-46 per annum.  I don't know how many of these were serious (i.e. probability of serious injury and/or death - although I think, on average, there's fewer than 20 deaths p.a. in total, which compared to 3500 road deaths is pretty good).  I don't know  either, in the case of serious accidents, how many occasions the guard and driver were uninjured and so able to help with 'taking charge'....although this is a statistic I'd be interested in to see if guards and drivers have a better chance of survival in fatal accidents - it'll give me a clue about where to sit in future!

[Statistics from the Office of Rail Regulation Safety Report: http://www.rail-reg.gov.uk/upload/pdf/rss_report_06.pdf]

Does make me wonder, as a naive passenger, what a guard actually does these days ?  I ask this out of genuine interest having seen the demise of bus conductors and airline flight engineers.  I wonder if the unions are picking a fight to defend a role which may no longer be needed perhaps ? (I'll put my tin hat on and take cover now!).

The details on the RMT website are very limited so maybe I^m not fully understanding the situation but from what I can see on the BBC Website the strike has been called because management have worked Sundays to cover for staff who do not want to work.

I would have thought that if the management are not fully qualify to drive / guard these services then this would have been reported to HMRI who would have taken action?

If there is more to this then why are the RMT not providing the details to try and win passengers support?

Strike dates confirmed:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/7180888.stm

It would appear to the average punter that the guard is just there to check tickets (but thats another story...), the Guards role is to be in charge of the train, the ultimate safety role that they carry is the ability to "protect the train" in an incident, if a train derails on a double track for example, then the derailed train might be straddling the other line, the guard must run ahead with detenators and track circuit clips and protect the other line so another train doesn't smash into the derailed train, the guard is also then responsible for getting the passengers to safety out of what could be a lot of twisted remains, if it happened to you then you would feel far safer by having someone to lead you who has been trained in such scenarios. The ex Thames trains services between Reading and Pad however are DOO (Driver Operated Only), this can only happen where mirrors/monitors are in use at the ends of the platforms so that the driver can see the whole length of the train in order to operate the doors safely, as on normal trains the guard is responsible for operating the doors and safe dispatch.

As I understand it - and was discussed here in December...


The management have an *agreement* with the RMT that management would not work in the case that guards etc refused to work overtime

As I understand it also - they were qualified before going into management and are therefore still qualified.

The staff are complaining that there are not enough staff and when they refuse to do overtime as they are tired, management do it rather than hiring new staff

In the real world, the answer is diddums.

Why on earth they agreed to such a stupid rule with the union I do not know - as I said, strikes me of a time I changed a light bulb as I'd waited ages and got told I was taking someones job but the correct procedures hadnt been followed.

Everyone has a right not to do overtime - but if they refuse - its no business of theirs who does it in their place.  End of story.

I think the mix of trains with guards and those without probably adds to my curiosity...what's the difference between both sorts derailing - at least in terms of the track protection outlined ?  After all (again, simplistic view here) if it's deemed unnecessary for DOD trains then why is it necessary for the other sort ?  Also, I'm intregued by the concept that in the event of a train derailment that the guard will be suffciently uninjured/unimpeded to carry out the safety responsibilities.  These aren't criticisms but a genuine interest into the rationale.

Sunday the 20th and Monday 21st January.

In Munich that week

phew

If germans go on strike they do it between 930 and 1030am

And their idea of strike is train every 20 minutes not every 10

Just because the RMT have 'called' the action and announced dates it does not mean the strike is DEFINATE.

I totally agree. FGW management will meet with RMT representatives in the near future. FGW will say 'how about we pay the guards more to work a sunday?' RMT will say 'yes please!'. End of. No strike.

Not normally in the habit of plugging my own work, but feel I should point out that:
a. Some journalists have qualified their reports of what might happen
b. Gave some prominence to the talks which are actually taking place today
c. That we are also keeping tabs on the separate dispute with Aslef, who also announced a ballot result yesterday, but no strikes for the time being.

http://www.oxfordmail.net/display.var.1958059.0.rail_dispute_union_sets_strike_date.php (http://www.oxfordmail.net/display.var.1958059.0.rail_dispute_union_sets_strike_date.php)

This is how today's Western Daily Press is reporting on the annoucement of strike action on the 20th/21st:

http://www.westerndailypress.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=146238&command=displayContent&sourceNode=146064&contentPK=19519423&folderPk=100268&pNodeId=145795

The article mentioned in the above report about Tom Harris losing patience with First which was reported in yesterday's Weston Daily Press can found here:

http://www.westerndailypress.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=146238&command=displayContent&sourceNode=146064&contentPK=19506980&folderPk=100268&pNodeId=145795

It seems that FGW is being attacked from all sides but when its announced that First is making record profits from their train companies its hard to feel sorry for them, especially with such large increases in fares. A bit of goodwill towards its long suffering passengers would'nt go a miss and would head off action from groups such as MTLS which seems to be getting more publicity by the day.

If you belong to a union, then I'm not sure what you'll make of the following link......
http://firstlatewestern.blogspot.com/2008/01/song-for-boys-on-picket-line.html

Further related links below.
http://www.rmtbristol.org.uk/2008/01/first_great_western_guards_and.html#more

http://www.rmtbristol.org.uk/2008/01/first_great_western_workers_to.html#more

http://www.rmtbristol.org.uk/2008/01/uks_worst_rail_service_faces_s.html#more

http://www.rmtbristol.org.uk/2008/01/firstgroup_shares_slip_after_r.html#more

A lot of the comments on this subject say that the strike is being called because of guards refusal to work on a sunday. It doesn't say anywhere in my contract of employment that I have to work sundays.( I am a 'west' guard). At our depot the agreement is that we work our booked sundays in the link(roster), only if they can't be covered by another guard working overtime, if we choose not to work.
During the winter timetable period our booked sundays are approximately 1 in 4, and as most guards are happy to work the overtime it's not a problem if we choose not to work.

A further note on this from a point of view of being contracted to work sundays is this. If I am happy to work my booked sunday, but wake up on the morning and feel too ill to work and phone in sick, I will not be paid for this day. Monday to saturday I will! That is because it is treated as overtime, and nobody can be forced to work overtime.

Personally speaking I think Sundays should be part of our working week, but if this happens then we won't get the enhanced pay!

Why don't MTLS choose to do their fare strike on the Monday!

[/quote]It would appear to the average punter that the guard is just there to check tickets (but thats another story...), the Guards role is to be in charge of the train, the ultimate safety role that they carry is the ability to "protect the train" in an incident, if a train derails on a double track for example, then the derailed train might be straddling the other line, the guard must run ahead with detenators and track circuit clips and protect the other line so another train doesn't smash into the derailed train, the guard is also then responsible for getting the passengers to safety out of what could be a lot of twisted remains, if it happened to you then you would feel far safer by having someone to lead you who has been trained in such scenarios. The ex Thames trains services between Reading and Pad however are DOO (Driver Operated Only), this can only happen where mirrors/monitors are in use at the ends of the platforms so that the driver can see the whole length of the train in order to operate the doors safely, as on normal trains the guard is responsible for operating the doors and safe dispatch.
[/quote]

The GUARD IS IN CHARGE OF HIS TRAIN
Train drivers only move the train after obtaining the Signal from the Guard.
Driver Only Operation (DOO) only came in after bitter strikes that could have finished Britains Railway altogether, that's what the TORY GOVERNMENT promised.

Vacman is almost right about the Guard going ahead to "Protect the Train" in an Incident, that is the duty of the Driver, the guard goes to the rear to protect the train.
This is essential as the train may be derailed all wheels, this would CLEAR the section and AUTOMATIC signals would clear allowing the next train forward, and a train can soon pick up speed, and trains take some stopping.
The unions were dead against DOO being brought in, it's a bit much to ask the Driver to protect both front and rear of the train.
Moreover in a Crash the Driver often comes of WORST, and if the Driver is unable too, who protects a DOO train?

Some think the Unions have too much Power, I'd say the Government had too much power when they brought in DOO.

An interseting note on DOO is that the HMRI will now not consider any future DOO schemes, so in effect they are admitting that it's unsafe! there are only a couple of operators that use this system.

In the Ladbroke Grove crash didn't the 165 involved catch fire?
Would a guard of helped?
I think so.

http://www.firstgreatwestern.co.uk/Content.aspx?id=111 (http://www.firstgreatwestern.co.uk/Content.aspx?id=111)

Correct me if i am wrong.....But at Ladbroke Grove on the 165 was there not a guard who happened to be road learning in the back cab at the time???

I have no idea. Would have been very lucky though for the passengers.

I think we should make clear what the link says :


Here is an RMT link.
http://www.rmtbristol.org.uk/2008/01/fgw_guards_dispute.html#more

Driver Only Operation, has a missing Safety Item (the Guard) and is now not extended because of ruling from HMRI, Ladbroke Grove happened because of Missing Safety Item (Catch Points), and whilst we could go into alsorts of reasons why Ladbroke Grove occured, the big issue is that the Track Layout lacked Catch Points.

To prevent another Ladbroke Grove trains and conflict areas of track have been fitted with TPWS, a Safety System which has cost an Estimated ^300 million per life it will save.

Now how many lives could the NHS Save if that money had gone to Hospitals

CJ Harrison has blasted the RMT over this issue (link below.)
http://firstgreatwestern.blogspot.com/2008/01/like-hole-in-head.html

Insider believes that the episode might act as a wake-up call but also says (quote from link below) :
http://indefenceoffirstgreatwestern.blogspot.com/2008/01/and-god-said-unto-noah.html

TPWS is one of the most common sense piece of safety equiptment ever designed, as it physicly wont let a train SPAD etc. You cannot put a price on human life!

If the TPWS was over-ridden for some reason then it could SPAD although under operational conditions its an ecxellent piece of kit!

You can put a price on human life, and until funding for public services is infinite, some decisions have to be made (and are made) as to whether the costs of safety improvements, medicines, treatments, etc justify the benefit.

Such decisions are inevitably very complex, and can have interesting side effects. The general consensus seems to be that a higher cost per life is justified for rail safety than road schemes, partly because of the inevitable public outcry at every death. However, as it's the passenger that ends up paying, this can have the effect of pushing more people onto roads and thus increasing road deaths.  

TPWS is generally acknowldeged to have been a very effective system at reducing risk on the railway, although it would not have had any effect at Hatfield, Selby, Potters Bar, Graygrigg, or Ufton Nervett. And of course, if the Turbos had been fitted with APT then Ladbroke Grove would not have happened either.    

If TPWS had been fitted at the time of Ladbrook grove then it may not have happened!

If TPWS was fitted at the time of Ladbrook Grove it WOULDN'T HAVE HAPPENED.
Had the Paddington Area had catch points, Ladbooke Grove wouldn't have happened

Catch points on a main line in that sort of confined area could cause more harm than good!

Bath Chronicle article (link below.)
http://thisisbath.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=180730&command=displayContent&sourceNode=232315&home=yes&more_nodeId1=163047&contentPK=19521640

Talks with unions have been 'promising'

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/7184765.stm

Load of rubbish! I was the driver of trains on a THURSDAY and on the following SATURDAY which were both guarded by a manager. He had worked another 3 trains as well on those day's!

indeed. Sundays are the main issue but leading up to Xmas there were managers working trains every day of the week - not just Sundays.

And given there were still an appalling number of cancellations then I'm glad they did work. I would rather get on a train where the guard was a manager than wait another hour or more.

Let's face it, statistically the chances of something happening (ie a safety related incident that puts passengers at risk) are virtually nil (ie much less than crossing the road, and I don't need to be chaperoned by a union member to do that). The chances that it happens, and then the manager is incapable of handling it, whereas the normal crew member would have been, is virtually nil x a small percentage. I'll run that risk thank you.

Sorry, I know that the staff shortages are not the workforce or the union's fault, but FGW are trying to provide a service, and if the only way they can do that whilst staff are using up their holiday entitlement is to use managers then good for them. The cancellation stats were awful around Xmas... I dread to think how much worse they would have been otherwise.

By the way, speaking to a friend's husband between Xmas and the new year who is a driver in the West Country he said "Yes, I'm booked on leave today, but was rostered to work. I didn't bother to tell anyone. It's Swindon's fault they don't know what's going on." Fault on all sides, FGW for cocking up, and the driver's fault for not telling them there was a problem and no showing.           

Here is the view from the Train Fellows blog (link below.)
http://trainfellows.blogspot.com/2008/01/strike-again-fgw.html

The fact is FGW allow for a certain percentage of trains/diagrams to be covered each day on overtime /rest day work when they calculate the level of staffing required. This is fraught with danger as it assumes that staff are available to work their days off, that they are at the right locations to cover the vacant turns, they are on the correct shifts and have the correct rest periods to cover these turns. Also the constraints of the Working Time Directive apply as to the maximum working week.
In some cases staff are rostered up to 44 hours in any given week and if they work a 10 hour Sunday and a rest day this means they are working in excess of 60 hours in that week. Over a 17 week period they are not permitted to work more than an average of 48 hours and cannot work more than 13 days in any 14 day period so at least one Sunday/Rest Day every 2 weeks they are not available to work.

Also not all staff are willing to work overtime which is their right so the pool of staff available to cover these vacant turns is greatly reduced. 

Well, look at Ufton Nervet, it was actually derailed by the set of points was it not?

Ultimately yes, however the car it crashed into started the ball rolling so to speak

The RMT executive tonight formally suspended the strike.

From the union's website:

FGW website posting

"Catch" (not sure if true catch) points were fitted in confined spaces on main lines but would have a far length of Overrun rails leading to buffer stops.

Peace breaks out between the RMT and FGW...

From the RMT website: