Train Operating Companies v Trade Unions dispute - ongoing discussion

[whole diary]

[TaplowGreen]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/01/07/sackings-break-ups-lost-business-strike-horror-stories-southern/


............brings it home from the perspective of those affected.

[Gordon the Blue Engine]

Maybe the settlement will be something like:
1   DOO^▸ (Driver-Only Operation (that is, trains which operate without carrying a guard)) is accepted on all trains that met Chief Inspector of Railways standards (eg on quality of CCTV^▸ (Closed Circuit Tele Vision) images)
2   All trains (maybe with carefully-specified exemptions for short distance trains that only call at staffed stations) have a second person on board.  This could be justified on DDA^» (Disability Discrimination Act - about) grounds to save face for the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about).  (I can’t really see why the TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company)’s can’t justify a “Guard” on a train carrying 300 people or more, when they know that passengers feel reassured by the presence of a "Guard" and whose wages will be more than covered by just 1 passenger’s fare and/or revenue from onboard ticket checks).

[broadgage]

Agree, the situation is serious and some of the language used by the union side suggests that it is an organised attempt to bring down the government, with the argument over whom controls train doors being only the excuse.

Some more moderate passengers are calling for the dismissal of the strikers and the engaging of replacements to end this sort of nonsense. The "Reagan option" referring to striking air traffic controllers in the USA being dismissed.

The more extreme passengers and groups thereof are talking openly about an organised and large scale non payment of fares and resisting any effort at fare collection by violence if need be.
One suggestion has been the organised and large scale use of expired season tickets, on the grounds that no effective service has been provided for months, and that season tickets up to a year or so out of date should still be valid. Any ticket inspector "silly enough to try and extract fares or fines should be dealt with" and "they cant arrest as all" and even "if a crowd kick to death an inspector, the courts could never prove who did it"

IMO^▸ (in my opinion), the government need to do something, and that something should not be giving in to the unions.

[TonyK]

IMO^▸ (in my opinion), the government need to do something, and that something should not be giving in to the unions.

Any ideas as to exactly what?

Sack all the staff, maybe, and replace them with army train drivers until new staff can be recruited and trained? As the staff don't work for the government, that falls at the first, before the other impossible bits are considered.

Or pass new laws to ban whatever the union is doing that annoys the government so much? It wasn't in the government's election manifesto, which complicates it a bit, and HMG is going to be a bit busy with Brexit until the next election. But with firm political will and cross-party support in both houses, any law could be in place within a year or so, after which we will see how the striking members get around it.

Or let Southern and the unions thrash out a deal without outside interference. The unions will not, remember, want to give in to the employer, and the longer this goes on, the harder it will get, but it can be done.

[ellendune]

Violence is not going to improve things especially if it is directed against those GTR employees who are not on strike. 

[grahame]

Look forward "x" years and isn't it in everyone's interest to have a clean, safe, comfortable, accessible for all, modern railway with trains running to time. Fares set an affordable level, sensible frequency and length of day with seats for almost all of the people almost all of the time, with a team of well paid and cared for staff from humblest up with jobs they enjoy, and whilst some services may receive financial support that should only be moderate, and there should be a return on "investment" - financial, enthusiasm, time, skill for everyone involved

The people are the key.  "I'm proud to have an association with the [yyyy] service. It works really well, we all love it and you should try it" say the operational team and their representatives, the management, the overseeing government agencies, and the passengers be they daily commuters or occasional travellers.  The people in all these groups should be the ambassadors ... and indeed I see elements of that already in so many places; alas, if you look at the press Southern is so far 'gone' with the sides seemingly at war that any movement towards Utopia feels like a visit to cloud cuckoo land.

[broadgage]

Violence is not going to improve things especially if it is directed against those GTR employees who are not on strike. 

Agree entirely, but I suspect that violence will break out, probably against those checking tickets rather than against guards or drivers who are working.
Those suffering from Southern are starting to feel that no lawful or peaceful redress is available.

[TaplowGreen]

IMO^▸ (in my opinion), the government need to do something, and that something should not be giving in to the unions.

Any ideas as to exactly what?

Sack all the staff, maybe, and replace them with army train drivers until new staff can be recruited and trained? As the staff don't work for the government, that falls at the first, before the other impossible bits are considered.

Or pass new laws to ban whatever the union is doing that annoys the government so much? It wasn't in the government's election manifesto, which complicates it a bit, and HMG is going to be a bit busy with Brexit until the next election. But with firm political will and cross-party support in both houses, any law could be in place within a year or so, after which we will see how the striking members get around it.

Or let Southern and the unions thrash out a deal without outside interference. The unions will not, remember, want to give in to the employer, and the longer this goes on, the harder it will get, but it can be done.

Problem is, on DOO^▸ (Driver-Only Operation (that is, trains which operate without carrying a guard)) the Union's case has been comprehensively shredded by an independent regulator (although I note, with depressing inevitability, that the Union is now accusing them of all being "Tories", which perhaps gives you an idea of the Union mentality and real aims and objectives), so I'm not sure really what they are expecting, or on what grounds they are continuing the strike?

And I have to say again, ASLEF^» (Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen - about) were prepared to sign up to DOO on other lines in exchange for a pay rise, which undermines their case even further.

As for the other justification, job losses, we've already been told that they're aren't going to be any.

This is as much (if not more) about politics than anything else. The Rail Unions power (such as it is) derives mostly (not exclusively) from their ability to massively inconvenience London and the South East commuter region, and they have been milking it for all its worth for decades......I don't doubt that Bob Crow is looking down (or maybe up!) and nodding approvingly.

There should absolutely not be mass Reagan style sackings, and violence/intimidation from either side is unforgiveable, however don't be surprised if the Government ride the increasing public and business anger against the rail Unions and look to legislate.

The Unions actions are costing people their businesses, jobs, home lives and costing the economy hundreds of millions of £ at a time when we should be emphasising to the World that we are open for business.

Move with the times, or move on elsewhere.

[Electric train]

Move with the times, or move on elsewhere.

I suppose the train drivers, on board train staff, platform staff could all look for jobs in other industries as lorry drivers, shelf stackers in supermarkets

[JayMac]

Move with the times, or move on elsewhere.

I suppose the train drivers, on board train staff, platform staff could all look for jobs in other industries as lorry drivers, shelf stackers in supermarkets

Why? Not one single rail employee is losing their job, or getting a pay cut.

The same can not be said for the Southern passengers who are being held to ransom by the RMT^▸ (National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers) and ASLEF^» (Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen - about).

[ChrisB]

Fares set an affordable level

Define affordable....
The housing crisis really isn't the fault of the railway. You should expect fares to be (a lot) higher if you move well away from your work. But I agree they ought to be fair - like a pence-per-mile calculation, so everyone is paying the same for each mile travelled, for example. This needs to be implemented very soon, and a reasonable ppm figure worked out & applied.

sensible frequency and length of day with seats for almost all of the people almost all of the time,

That's harder to implement - it'll act just like building another motorway by attracting even more pax.

with a team of well paid and cared for staff from humblest up with jobs they enjoy, and whilst some services may receive financial support that should only be moderate, and there should be a return on "investment" - financial, enthusiasm, time, skill for everyone involved

I think they (operations) generally are better off than most of us already. There are some, almost all the lowest paid that ought to get the living wage, and the fares set above need to allow this

[Tim]

Maybe the settlement will be something like:
1   DOO^▸ (Driver-Only Operation (that is, trains which operate without carrying a guard)) is accepted on all trains that met Chief Inspector of Railways standards (eg on quality of CCTV^▸ (Closed Circuit Tele Vision) images)
2   All trains (maybe with carefully-specified exemptions for short distance trains that only call at staffed stations) have a second person on board.  This could be justified on DDA^» (Disability Discrimination Act - about) grounds to save face for the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about).  (I can’t really see why the TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company)’s can’t justify a “Guard” on a train carrying 300 people or more, when they know that passengers feel reassured by the presence of a "Guard" and whose wages will be more than covered by just 1 passenger’s fare and/or revenue from onboard ticket checks).

100% agree that an agreement has to look something like that.  The key question that your post doesn't address though is whether the second person on board is "safety critical" meaning that the service can't run without them.  If they are not then even if there is a genuine desire to roster a second person under all normal circumstances  the service can still run without them in an "emergency situation" which of course would include a strike, thereby significantly reducing the Union's future bargaining power.   That is what is at the nub of this dispute.

[trainbuff]

This dispute IS political from both sides. Government and Unions themselves. Both have stated it!

I cant help feeling though that the ability to run with no second member of staff, ie not safety critical, in an emergency will change over time. If the dispute ended tomorrow with this agreement how long before an emergency becomes 'no member of staff employed' to work as an on board supervisor? People may not lose their jobs but no-one else will be employed to replace them to save money. Maybe not next franchise but what about the one after?

What about other longer distance franchises? If DOO^▸ (Driver-Only Operation (that is, trains which operate without carrying a guard)) in the way described is agreed, then how long before trains run from say Cardiff or Swansea to Swindon through the Severn Tunnel without a second member of staff? There has to be a solution that will give both sides what is needed. Driver control can work, as on Crosscountry or Virgin trains and gives the advantage of reducing station dwell times.

I would dread to think what would happen if a driver was taken ill between Paddington and Reading with no other crew. The train would be brought to a halt by the cab safety devices but with no announcements how long would it be before passengers would attempt to get out of the train?

How comfortable would passengers feel travelling large distances on other companies with only a driver on board?

Just a thought

[Gordon the Blue Engine]

The independent regulator may indeed have said that it is safe (subject to conditions) for Drivers to operate the doors, and I agree that ASLEF^» (Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen - about) are on weak ground challenging this.

But there is an entirely separate question as to whether it is safe to operate a train with no “Guard” on board. The incidents at Watford Tunnel, at Westbury with an HST^▸ (High Speed Train) hitting a tree, and at several level crossing incidents all resulted in the Driver being incapacitated and thus unable to carry out safety procedures.  If there is no Guard, who takes responsibility for passenger safety? Seconds count in contacting the signaller and protecting the line.  Who will go on the PA^▸ (Public Address) and reassure passengers and make sure they don’t put themselves in danger by alighting etc? 

Are we supposed to rely upon a passenger dialling 999? 

[stuving]

The last two posts imply that we should expect the unions to be our main safety authority, at least in the sense of being able to overrule whatever the government has set up. Really?

Unions certainly have a good claim to a prominent role, alongside operators and other players, but surely they should be making their case to the regulators. If they don't, or if (as it seems) that link isn't working, that needs to be addressed.