Passenger protest against Southern Trains

[Guy Fawkes]

Trust me, I'm no great supporter of the Unions and I'm not militant but, whilst this is naturally about protecting jobs (more so in the future really) this is predominantly a safety issue - no one will ever convince me it is as safe to have just me at the front of a 12 coach train carrying 1500 people compared to having a second safety critically trained member of crew.

Why can't staff based on the platform signal to the driver it's safe to now close the doors rather than the conductor waiting for this signal and closing the doors? - pretty sure there is something similar is in operation at many locations already (staff on platform hold up a lollypop type thing and blow a whistle to say it's clear and have done for years)

 

[Deadly Danson]

Why can't staff based on the platform signal to the driver it's safe to now close the doors rather than the conductor waiting for this signal and closing the doors? - pretty sure there is something similar is in operation at many locations already (staff on platform hold up a lollypop type thing and blow a whistle to say it's clear and have done for years)

Yep, that's fine - happens at major stations and is one of the reasons why DOO has been allowed on the main line over the years - mainly terminal stations as well as Gatwick, Haywards Heath, East Croydon and Clapham junction amongst others - as long as someone can stand back and view the whole train that's the same principle as having a guard close them - in which case i have no objection to closing the doors. But those people are not at the rest of the stations that Southern want to go DOO, they actually want to save a few more pennies by cutting back on the existing ones anyway and also you still need a member of safety critically trained train crew on board for emergencies and for customer service/protection. But yes, if all stations were manned by platform staff every train driver would be happy to close the doors.

 

[Freddie Goodwin.]

The culture everywhere is all about cutting costs, which seems to equate to cutting staff. Strangely, this happens at the bottom & seldom at the top.

I am surprised the trains are allowed to run in the current state of overcrowding. How long before somebody actually dies on a train but goes unnoticed until people leave the train and the person falls down?

If staffing levels are so low that the system runs on overtime then it's bad management. Too much overtime leads to stress & sickness. B&H buses are going the same way.

 

[Ernest]

The culture everywhere is all about cutting costs, which seems to equate to cutting staff. Strangely, this happens at the bottom & seldom at the top.

I am surprised the trains are allowed to run in the current state of overcrowding. How long before somebody actually dies on a train but goes unnoticed until people leave the train and the person falls down?

If staffing levels are so low that the system runs on overtime then it's bad management. Too much overtime leads to stress & sickness. B&H buses are going the same way.

Owned by the same company funny enough and their employees striking too

 

[Freddie Goodwin.]

And it's not all about the money but how staff are being treated.

Maybe it's a bit of the 'Thatchers Children' generation who believe anyone is disposable for a cheaper option.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Why can't staff based on the platform signal to the driver it's safe to now close the doors rather than the conductor waiting for this signal and closing the doors? - pretty sure there is something similar is in operation at many locations already (staff on platform hold up a lollypop type thing and blow a whistle to say it's clear and have done for years)

How many stations actually have staff? The bigger ones do, but there are a lot of stations which don't.

Southern are also trying to close down the ticket offices, saying everyone can use the machines or buy online. It's all cost cutting. Those unions are also going to strike so it isn't just the RMT.

 

[Guy Fawkes]

Good article on the subject here and worth reading in full:
http://www.independent.co.uk/travel...-does-it-mean-for-the-future-of-a7177716.html

Some key parts are taken from the article and are below:

Southern Railway, which primarily runs trains from London Victoria and London Bridge to Surrey and Sussex, wants “driver-only operation” (DOO) on all its services; at present on three out of five of its trains, the guard opens and closes doors.

Southern says its plans are not about job cuts; guards’ staff numbers and salaries will be unaffected. Without the door duty, it claims, guards will be better able to help passengers. There will be a small but significant reduction in “dwell time”, which should accelerate trains on one of the most congested networks in the world. In addition, trains will be able to run if a guard is unavailable, cutting the number of cancellations. This last issue appears to be the key sticking point.

The RMT insists: “Members are taking strike action and losing pay because they are concerned about passenger safety”. It says there should always be a guard on board “to protect the safety of the train and passengers and also assist passengers in the event of an incident, accident or emergency”.


Q: How dangerous is driver-only operation?
A: The RMT union says that a 64 per cent rise in Southern’s passenger numbers over the past 15 years “increases the risk to passenger safety at the platform/train interface” and that more staff are needed. But in June, the Rail Accident Investigation Branch said “we have found no evidence to suggest that driver-only operated trains cannot be dispatched safely”.

What’s particularly odd about the dispute is made clear on platform 4 at Gatwick Airport station several times an hour. On Thameslink trains to East Croydon, which are part of the same franchise as Southern, the driver closes the doors. Three minutes later, on a Southern train to East Croydon, the guard closes the doors.

Q: Surely anything that distracts the driver from his or her key role is a bad move?
A: Were money no object, we could have a dedicated door-opener-and-closer on all trains. But in the real world, train drivers in different countries have a wide range of responsibilities. On rural routes in Scandinavia, for example, you might find the driver selling you the ticket as well as operating the doors, helping disabled passengers, handling parcels and driving the train. There is inevitably a trade-off between staffing and safety, and as a society we must decide where that balance should be struck.

Q: Will the dispute spread?
A: The same fundamental issue has already led to strikes on Scotrail. Guards on Great Western Railway have also taken industrial action because of the company’s plans for driver-only operation on the new high-speed trains that are due to enter service in the next few years.

It could get a lot worse before a settlement is reached. The RMT union, and the drivers’ union, ASLEF, have warned that they could tell members to conduct a “comprehensive final safety check” before a driver-only operated train departs. That would mean, says the RMT, “that the driver physically leaves the cab and checks each door”. On a 12-car train, that could add many minutes to each stop, effectively bringing parts of the network to a standstill.

So only 3 out of 5 Southern trains operate with the guards operating the doors under the current system, and at Gatwick we have 2 train franchises who leave the same platform a few minutes apart where one has the doors closed by the driver (Thameslink) and one by the Guard (Southern) - are these other services that much more dangerous to the passengers that the guards feel they need to strike and cause all this disruption to commuters for their benefit (especially as the vast majority of passengers don't care who actually closes the doors)

 

[Guy Fawkes]

How many stations actually have staff? The bigger ones do, but there are a lot of stations which don't.

Southern are also trying to close down the ticket offices, saying everyone can use the machines or buy online. It's all cost cutting. Those unions are also going to strike so it isn't just the RMT.

Society changes and things move forward, do you use a cash point / cash back from a business or do you always go into the bank to get your money out?
Do you still write cheques or do you use bank cards / cash / other forms of electronic payment like paypal to pay for things?

Life moves on and ways of working changes, businesses know they have to adapt to changing times for they are likely to fail (BHS didn't and they wet to the wall) Unions want to keep things like they are if they think there is chances of job losses brought on by the changes, even if failures to adapt can lead to the failure of that business and eventually the loss of all of the jobs there affecting all their members

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Society changes and things move forward, do you use a cash point / cash back from a business or do you always go into the bank to get your money out?
Do you still write cheques or do you use bank cards / cash / other forms of electronic payment like paypal to pay for things?

Life moves on and ways of working changes, businesses know they have to adapt to changing times for they are likely to fail (BHS didn't and they wet to the wall) Unions want to keep things like they are if they think there is chances of job losses brought on by the changes, even if failures to adapt can lead to the failure of that business and eventually the loss of all of the jobs there affecting all their members

I can't use a bank because they've all closed down in my town. I have to go to Seaford to go into the bank and yes, I do go in because there are transactions that have to be done face to face. I do write cheques to go in birthday cards.

I have a delay repay cheque from Southern. I want to use a ticket office to cash it in.

There is room for both. Not every journey is straightforward and advice is useful from a ticket office.

 

[Deadly Danson]

Good article on the subject here and worth reading in full:
http://www.independent.co.uk/travel...-does-it-mean-for-the-future-of-a7177716.html

Some key parts are taken from the article and are below:


So only 3 out of 5 Southern trains operate with the guards operating the doors under the current system, and at Gatwick we have 2 train franchises who leave the same platform a few minutes apart where one has the doors closed by the driver (Thameslink) and one by the Guard (Southern) - are these other services that much more dangerous to the passengers that the guards feel they need to strike and cause all this disruption to commuters for their benefit (especially as the vast majority of passengers don't care who actually closes the doors)

That'll be the RAIB with Charles Horton of GTR on the board then. And again, at Gatwick platform staff dispatch the train regardless of whether there is a guard so it makes no difference. and once again - the dispute isn't solely down to who shuts the doors despite every sodding report on TV stating that it is - otherwise the RMT wouldn't have offered to accept Scotrail's offer.

 

[Deadly Danson]

Society changes and things move forward, do you use a cash point / cash back from a business or do you always go into the bank to get your money out?
Do you still write cheques or do you use bank cards / cash / other forms of electronic payment like paypal to pay for things?

Life moves on and ways of working changes, businesses know they have to adapt to changing times for they are likely to fail (BHS didn't and they wet to the wall) Unions want to keep things like they are if they think there is chances of job losses brought on by the changes, even if failures to adapt can lead to the failure of that business and eventually the loss of all of the jobs there affecting all their members

You seem to be blinded by your view of the unions. Again, I ask you how will the service be modernised and improved for the benefit of the passengers by removing a safety critically trained member of staff?

 

[Ernest]

And it's not all about the money but how staff are being treated.

Maybe it's a bit of the 'Thatchers Children' generation who believe anyone is disposable for a cheaper option.

Funny how it is always the lowest paid staff who face job losses and pay cuts whilst those at the top of the pile get their gold plated salary rises and share options despite whatever failure they preside over

 

[Seasider78]

You seem to be blinded by your view of the unions. Again, I ask you how will the service be modernised and improved for the benefit of the passengers by removing a safety critically trained member of staff?

Will both sides simply stand firm until they get their way or is there a compromise to be found?

For example would this following situation be acceptable

1) Doors can be operated by drivers on main routes with manned platforms

2) Southern stick to promise of commitment to second person on board of all trains

3) In events where delays or issues prevent the second person making the train it can leave but only providing the service is a DOO approved route

Just trying to understand if there is any middle ground here

 

[Bozza]

But isn't that why the reduced timetable was introduced ? If so why are trains still being cancelled ?

A cynic would suggest that the following is playing out...

Southern: This is our timetable and the trains we'll run.
Staff/RMT: I've got a cold *cough*, I can't come in today. Also, when I do come in, I can't work overtime any more.
Southern: We've reduced the timetable and cut services, but at least our customers will now have surety as to when trains will be running and can plan accordingly.
Staff/RMT: *cough* That's what they think *cough*. Oh that cold is back again.

Have Southern been called to account yet as to why the emergency timetable is not providing the surety they claimed it would?

 

[Deadly Danson]

Will both sides simply stand firm until they get their way or is there a compromise to be found?

For example would this following situation be acceptable

1) Doors can be operated by drivers on main routes with manned platforms

2) Southern stick to promise of commitment to second person on board of all trains

3) In events where delays or issues prevent the second person making the train it can leave but only providing the service is a DOO approved route

Just trying to understand if there is any middle ground here

There is always a compromise and yes the above could in theory work. In all honestly I don't think the RMT will budge from needing the guarantee that the second member of train crew has to be on board at all times (because otherwise it's just another step down the line to getting rid of guards) and that this person has to be fully safety critically trained and the Dft is not allowing GTR to accede to this because they want to do away with the guard long term. I think the RMT are prepared to compromise on the dispatch of the train - hence their willingness to accept Scotrail's offer (which GTR should really offer if they were serious about the reason for their proposals being that the guard can walk up and down the train more but we all know this isn't the case).
I honestly think if they could, GTR would happily offer the Scotrail proposal but the Dft won't let them.

 

[Bozza]

You seem to be blinded by your view of the unions. Again, I ask you how will the service be modernised and improved for the benefit of the passengers by removing a safety critically trained member of staff?

Ask commuters trying to get back to Sussex whether they'd see their train leaving for home when it would previously be cancelled "due to shortage of train crew" as a service improvement or not. I suspect you'd get an overwhelming "hell, yeah!"

That aside, are you able to outline for us laymen what training the guard currently gets and what Southern are proposing they will get in their new role.

 

[Deadly Danson]

Ask commuters trying to get back to Sussex whether they'd see their train leaving for home when it would previously be cancelled "due to shortage of train crew" as a service improvement or not. I suspect you'd get an overwhelming "hell, yeah!"

That aside, are you able to outline for us laymen what training the guard currently gets and what Southern are proposing they will get in their new role.

To quote myself from an earlier post - the training has moved from (I think) 12 weeks down to 3 weeks due to the removal of safety critical functions. I heard yesterday that the new On board supervisors were being trained how to evacuate a train - ON PLATFORMS ONLY!! as they will not be trained how to evacuate during emergency situations on the running line. I wonder how passengers evacuate a train on a platform -that's right - they just get off!! They won't be taught emergency procedures - how to lay track circuit clips, detonators in the event of emergencies etc.And that's all of course before we get to the closing of the door issue which has been discussed on here in depth.
I believe one of the ex Revenue Protection Officers who have been effectively forced into the OBS role, complained that the emergency training was only a few hours long and was just about useless.

And on your first point JUST EMPLOY ENOUGH STAFF!

 

[Tony Towner's Fridge]

Just sack the f*****s.....

No public service organisation should be allowed to strike....

Simple but sensible policy...

300k deficit...bill the RMT

TNBA

TTF

 

[Guy Fawkes]

You seem to be blinded by your view of the unions. Again, I ask you how will the service be modernised and improved for the benefit of the passengers by removing a safety critically trained member of staff?

Because it is deemed safe to operate without the guards doing that role (which the unions claim the dispute is solely about.)

We live in a modern world with things like cctv and other electronic systems which can be used to make sure that the doors are shut properly and that passengers arn't caught in the door, etc before the train pulls away.

The unions are bringing this disruption because they see this development as a future risk to jobs.

When the trains switched from Steam, didn't the train operators still had to have a stoker on board due to union action. (with nothing to do as the role wasn't actually needed on diesel or electric trains and it took many years for this to finally go because the unions are dinosaurs opposed to change and modernisation?) - This sounds similar, with union claims that only the guards should open and close the doors.

They they are not talking about abolishing guards from trains, the guards will still be moving up and down the train instead and potentially interacting with passengers more during the journey, the only ones claiming that they will systematically remove this member of staff is the unions. (fear of potential job losses some time in the future which may never happen anyway should this change be brought in - the action we see is their way to try to prevent these changes as they have no interest in helping the company change it's working practices and potentially improve their service to passengers - usual response is that it's all about corporate greed and making as much profit as possible, not caring for the consumer (hence the safety argument in this case) etc)

 

[Guy Fawkes]

Southern won't back down because they run the franchise and shouldn't have how they operate dictated to by a union who arn't responsible for running the service and have little or no interest in the companies future, only it's members.
The union won't back down because they see it as a potential threat to jobs and care little about the problems their actions may cause the company but more importantly the passengers because they are trying to force their will upon the company and force them to run it their way when it's not their responsibility to do that.
The Government won't step in because the franchise haven't broken their contract, and their proposals don't break that contract either and they have the right to make this change if they see fit, they also won't step in because this is a dispute between a private company and a union

No one comes out well in this and the ones that suffer are the passengers who should be the priority for all sides imo but instead are being used as pawns in this dispute