First Great Western - industrial action in 2015 - merged topic

[whole diary]

[ChrisB]

That system works extremely well on Chiltern in their DOO^▸ (Driver-Only Operation (that is, trains which operate without carrying a guard)) area.

[Worcester_Passenger]

That system works extremely well on Chiltern in their DOO^▸ (Driver-Only Operation (that is, trains which operate without carrying a guard)) area.

I'm reassured by that.

I agree that assistance-at-the-next-worthwhile-station is the best strategy. Though I'm not sure that you could rely on other passengers with mobiles.

[4064ReadingAbbey]

The proposal is that trains wouldn't be able to run DOO^▸ (Driver-Only Operation (that is, trains which operate without carrying a guard)) unless it's an area that already has DOO, and even then it would only be if a train manager really couldn't be found.. e.g. disruption.

So, say disruption has caused displacement, so train manager is at Reading, but the train and driver are at Paddington. Current process would be cancel from Paddington, run empty to Reading and resume train, proposal would allow passengers to be on board to Reading where train manager could be collected.

That sounds good if I'm a passenger at Paddington. What happens if the emergency alarm goes off in the disabled toilet on the way to Reading?

As all the suburban trains running between Paddington and Reading are already DOO and will have either a toilet for disabled or, in the case of the Crossrail trains, no toilet at all, why should your hypothetical case be any more significant/dangerous/awkward in a Class 800/801 train than a suburban train?

In any case the journey time from Paddington to Reading will soon be back to that achieved in the early days of the HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train), i.e., 20 or 22 minutes. Assuming the hypothetical passenger goes to the toilet 5 minutes after the train has left Paddington and then, a bit later, calls for assistance the train will have less than 10 minutes to run to reach Reading.

If the passenger in the toilet for disabled waits much longer before calling for assistance then it is most likely that the next suitable stop will be Didcot or Newbury rather than Reading.

[Tim]

The proposal is that trains wouldn't be able to run DOO^▸ (Driver-Only Operation (that is, trains which operate without carrying a guard)) unless it's an area that already has DOO, and even then it would only be if a train manager really couldn't be found.. e.g. disruption.

So, say disruption has caused displacement, so train manager is at Reading, but the train and driver are at Paddington. Current process would be cancel from Paddington, run empty to Reading and resume train, proposal would allow passengers to be on board to Reading where train manager could be collected.

That sounds good if I'm a passenger at Paddington. What happens if the emergency alarm goes off in the disabled toilet on the way to Reading?

As a passenger I do have concerns about trains being run with only a driver.  I don't necessarily see the need for the second person to be a fully qualified Guard.  But I do think that there needs to be cast-iron guarantees that a train will not run without a second member of staff (with the ability to contact control, fetch a first aid kit, call the BTP^▸ (British Transport Police), open a locked toilet door, and provide reassurance to passengers)  I don't care if that person is normally a buffet steward, a trolley steward, a ticket checker or a cleaner; but I think when you are talking about 600 people at 125mph with gaps of up to half an hour between stations,  having the driver as the only employee on board is going too far. 

A constructive proposal from the RMT^▸ (National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers) would be to offer for Guards now freed from door opening duties to undertake a customer service role in order to pay their way.  After all, on aircraft the cabin crew are there for your safety and highly trained in aircraft evacuation etc, but they spend all their time looking after the passengers and only drop that role in an emergency.   

I wonder if FGW^▸ (First Great Western) would accept that a train cannot leave without a Guard if in return the Guard agreed to push a drinks trolley and thereby cover some of his/her costs

[ChrisB]

oooh, you'll need to persuade the RMT^▸ (National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers) that their highly trained, safety critical jobs aren't being dumbed down! Good luck on that one....

[TaplowGreen]

.......couldn't the driver push the drinks trolley through the train, check tickets and handle Customer Service issues too?

Once the train's moving there's not much for him to do between stations after all, surely he could just get one of the passengers to keep an eye on things up front whilst he's keeping busy pouring tea and clipping tickets?

.......got to sweat the assets after all!!! 

[grahame]

.......couldn't the driver push the drinks trolley through the train, check tickets and handle Customer Service issues too?

I think I can spot a tongue well in a cheek there ... but got me thinking. Once all the local stuff's out the way on Crossrail, will that leave spare station capacity?   Why not have a longer time to turn trains around, get people to board earlier - that way you would have time to weight luggage and make extra charges for big / heavy items, and you could even install a sort of cafe in one of the carriages where people could buy food and drinks.  Making money even without the cost of moving the train 

[TaplowGreen]

.......couldn't the driver push the drinks trolley through the train, check tickets and handle Customer Service issues too?

I think I can spot a tongue well in a cheek there ... but got me thinking. Once all the local stuff's out the way on Crossrail, will that leave spare station capacity?   Why not have a longer time to turn trains around, get people to board earlier - that way you would have time to weight luggage and make extra charges for big / heavy items, and you could even install a sort of cafe in one of the carriages where people could buy food and drinks.  Making money even without the cost of moving the train 

Inspiring suggestions...............how about a Wetherspoons on every train? Hot towels and massages? In "flight" movies? Beds in First class? The possibilities are endless! 

[Tim]

oooh, you'll need to persuade the RMT^▸ (National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers) that their highly trained, safety critical jobs aren't being dumbed down! Good luck on that one....

"glorified Kit-Kat sellers" is a term Comrade Bob Crow used to describe such a role I believe (other chocolate biscuits are available)

My tongue was slightly in my cheek.  But the point is that their job would could still be categorised as safety critical.  Trains would still be unable to leave without them and that means that they would still have a strong hand in negotiating pay because a strike would cost the company in the way that a catering or even a revenue protection strike would not (and let's be honest that is what the RMT cares about really). 

 It is a rather old fashioned view that having a safety critical job means that you can't do anything else other than sit in your cab in case you are needed (doubtless with a stack of detonators in hand, and a red flag under one arm ready to spring into action) .  The reality is that that kind of guard is becoming obsolete because of technology improvements.  It isn't unreasonable to say that passenger safety is enhanced by having an extra member of staff on the train other than the driver (who is after all busy driving and locked into the front cab), but the specification of that extra safety role should be informed by an objective analysis of what the main risks to passengers are and staff provided with the training to mitigate the main risks that exist today rather than the risks that existed in the days of less sophisticated signalling technology.  I would hazard a guess that the main risks to passengers today comes from medical emergencies and the behaviour of other passengers.  Train "Guards" to deal with those issues (or call for help from the ambulance and police services) and the argument that they are safety critical becomes stronger.

I am generally on the side of the worker against the bosses.  The RMT has done very well in getting decent pay for their members and I do not begrudge them that, but  it seems to me that the guard's role as currently understood will soon become obsolete (just like the locomotive fireman's role).  My advice to the RMT is that if they are not prepared to work with the TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company) and redefine the Guard's role then the role will disappear.  They ought to be redefining the role in a way that firstly makes it a more sensible economic position for the ToC (adding customer service roles to that helps) and which retains its status as safety critical by requiring training in mitigation of the current risks to passengers. 

The idea that there is a split between customer service roles and safety critical roles is stupid.  A look at the aviation and ferry industry will show you that.   

[Tim]

In "flight" movies? Beds in First class? The possibilities are endless! 

I think both movies and airline style pod beds are both in the specification of the new Caledonian Sleeper.

[JayMac]

From the BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page):

RMT^▸ (National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers) to decide on future rail strikes after rejecting FGW^▸ (First Great Western) offer

A union representing rail workers has said it will decide on future strike dates after rejecting the latest offer by First Great Western (FGW).

High-speed services between London, the West of England and Wales were hit last week when about 2,000 Rail, Maritime and Transport (RMT) members walked out.

The dispute is over concerns guards and buffet cars will be disposed of on new Hitachi Inter City Express trains.
The RMT said "core issues remain unresolved" in FGW's revised offer.

The new trains are set to run on the Great Western main line from 2017.

'Lack of assurance'

FGW said it had "made very clear" its "commitments on job security and the customer experience".

But one of the sticking points is that FGW wants drivers to have control over doors, instead of the guards who are currently in charge of this role.

The RMT said this was "a clear dilution of the important safety role of the guard and contrary to RMT policy".

The union said a "lack of assurance" on protecting engineering jobs and keeping the buffet car facilities were also issues.

RMT General Secretary Mick Cash said: "Despite the media spin played out by the company yesterday the reality of the offer now received by the union falls well short of what is required in the key areas of jobs, services and safety for us to reach an agreement. As a result we will now be meeting with our sister unions to discuss the campaign strategy and RMT's executive will be deciding on future strike dates next week."

The new trains are being introduced under the Intercity Express Programme on routes between London Paddington and Oxford, Bristol and South Wales.

[Timmer]

Well Mark Hopwood did warn there could be more strikes and that is looking very likely now with the RMT^▸ (National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers) looking to drag other unions into the dispute as well.

[ChrisB]

Presumably, further ballots would be needed by the other unions first though?

[Timmer]

Presumably, further ballots would be needed by the other unions first though?

Yep

[JayMac]

From the Transport Salaried Staffs' Association:

First Great Western: Managers being balloted for Industrial Action

20 July 2015

A ballot paper asking you to vote on industrial action has been sent to you. You are urged to vote, and vote YES!

TSSA^» (Transport Salaried Staffs' Association - about) has taken the step of balloting you for industrial action short of strike action as a last resort. FGW^▸ (First Great Western) has failed to reverse its decision to terminate the collective bargaining agreement for managers, taking away the right of FGW managers to be collectively represented by a trade union.

And now it has stooped to threatening to use anti-trade union laws against TSSA, and has refused to give the union assurances that managers will not be forced to cover the duties of RMT^▸ (National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers) members taking industrial action and other duties that they do not normally perform. TSSA is particularly concerned about those managers that have been put under intolerable pressure to force them to train for and undertake duties they don't normally perform.

Many managers are working well in excess of their contracted hours in order to carry out their normal duties, and are often working from home or checking email and phones in their own time. Some are not taking all of their leave entitlement, and many don't take proper rest breaks at work. Most managers are committed professionals and are happy to do so. However, there are clearly problems of managers suffering excessive stress.

But First Great Western now wants its managers to take on the jobs of other staff as well as their own, exacerbating these problems and further degrading the work/life balance of managers. Managers are surely entitled to a decent personal and home life!

Some managers object to the company forcing them to cover the duties of striking colleagues. They know the difficulties that they will have in rebuilding relationships with those colleagues after the RMT dispute is over, and that will just add to their stress.

The company seems intent on working its managers into the ground and having taken away the right of managers to be collectively represented by TSSA, there is no effective avenue for their issues to be discussed and dealt with.

Managers must say clearly that enough is enough. It is time to say NO to bullying, and NO to the abuse by the company of their goodwill and professionalism, and YES to industrial action!

By voting YES, managers will put themselves in a position where they can act together to refuse to undertake duties that they do not normally perform. It must be stressed that TSSA is not asking managers to take strike action, or indeed any other action.