|
gpn01
|
 |
« Reply #15 on: January 10, 2008, 18:56:42 » |
|
if your train derailed you would expect a competent person to take charge of your safety.
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!). |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Duncan
Newbie
Posts: 1
|
|
« Reply #16 on: January 10, 2008, 20:12:26 » |
|
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.
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? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Shazz
|
|
« Reply #17 on: January 10, 2008, 20:57:24 » |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
vacman
|
|
« Reply #18 on: January 10, 2008, 22:00:47 » |
|
if your train derailed you would expect a competent person to take charge of your safety.
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!). 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. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Mookiemoo
|
|
« Reply #19 on: January 11, 2008, 00:12:02 » |
|
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.
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? 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. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Ditched former sig - now I need to think of something amusing - brain hurts -I'll steal from the master himself - Einstein:
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."
"Gravitation is not responsible for people falling in love"
|
|
|
|
gpn01
|
|
« Reply #20 on: January 11, 2008, 00:12:28 » |
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Tickets Please
|
|
« Reply #21 on: January 11, 2008, 00:13:22 » |
|
It has recently been confirmed by the RMT▸ that they will call strikes by FGW▸ guards on the 20th January.
Sunday the 20th and Monday 21st January. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Any comments made are mine and not that of my employer. My comments do not necessarily reflect the views of my employers and should be taken as my personal opinion.
|
|
|
|
Mookiemoo
|
|
« Reply #22 on: January 11, 2008, 00:18:52 » |
|
It has recently been confirmed by the RMT▸ that they will call strikes by FGW▸ guards on the 20th January.
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 |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Ditched former sig - now I need to think of something amusing - brain hurts -I'll steal from the master himself - Einstein:
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."
"Gravitation is not responsible for people falling in love"
|
|
|
|
oooooo
|
|
« Reply #23 on: January 11, 2008, 00:49:05 » |
|
Just because the RMT▸ have 'called' the action and announced dates it does not mean the strike is DEFINATE.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
gaf71
|
|
« Reply #24 on: January 11, 2008, 01:27:32 » |
|
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. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
willc
|
|
« Reply #25 on: January 11, 2008, 08:42:00 » |
|
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 |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lee
|
|
« Reply #27 on: January 11, 2008, 10:27:32 » |
|
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: January 11, 2008, 11:06:05 by Lee Fletcher »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
gaf71
|
|
« Reply #28 on: January 11, 2008, 13:13:11 » |
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
vacman
|
|
« Reply #29 on: January 11, 2008, 13:16:29 » |
|
Personally speaking I think Sundays should be part of our working week, but if this happens then we won't get the enhanced pay!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Click on the map to explore geographics
