Southern Rail STRIKE details

[Tony Meolas Loan Spell]

I've just heard someone on LBC say that the Government pays Southern to operate the franchise i.e. the company does not receive the revenue. It is not a process used with the other rail franchises and means Southern have no incentive to make their customers happy. Maybe it's been discussed on here but passed me by completely. The decision to organize the franchise in that manner should, in my opinion, be investigated as it is not in the interests of rail users or the rail industry.

Yes it has been discussed. In short this is the government model that they want to adopt for all other franchises. It has to work from the govt point of view because its their ideology. So whether thats turn a blind eye/throw more taxpayers money at it. But from their point of view it has to "work" anything else would be regarded as failure.

Dont forget the Government have stepped in on failing franchises before...but not this time, ask yourself why...

 

[Tony Meolas Loan Spell]

To re-iterate, the RMT is prepared to accept DOO on London-Brighton services.

It's the East Coast (Brighton to Eastbourne / Hastings) and West Coast (Brighton to Worthing / Chichester / Portsmouth) services which the RMT is most concerned about. SASTA intends to put DOO in across the entire network (aside from the London-Uckfield line, we're told), even though the stations along those lines don't have the neessary technology to safely allow the driver to make the call as to when to close the doors. Nor do SASTA (who run those stations) have any intention on putting that technology in.

Unless, of course, the drivers do what the TOCs own safety reports suggests - leave the cab, and check down the platforms themselves.

It's a separate issue, but dwell times on the stations will increase (even 1 min per station has a knock-on effect), leading to further delays and cancellations back down the line.

Not quite. Trains still cant run from London Vic/Bridge without a guard. Its happened 5 times in last 2 weeks.

I agree the outer stations have the problem so its simple. DOO all round and the govt need to invest to make it happen or a condition of the franchise that they do.

 

[Gazwag]

Should be fun for those not attending the Bristol City away game, but instead looking to go to Lewes for the firework celebrations, and also the Wolves home game

Typical the unions ****ing over peoples livelihoods as well as their enjoyment, no coincidence with these dates and of course costing bhafc another £100k+ and not forgetting all the charities who will suffer with the massive drop in attendance at Lewes on the 5th - Palace in disguise ?

 

[Tony Meolas Loan Spell]

Unless, of course, the drivers do what the TOCs own safety reports suggests - leave the cab, and check down the platforms themselves.

It's a separate issue, but dwell times on the stations will increase (even 1 min per station has a knock-on effect), leading to further delays and cancellations back down the line.

Actually Kings Cross to Grantham (which then goes onto yonder) route the driver does do this.

 

[Hotchilidog]

I've just heard someone on LBC say that the Government pays Southern to operate the franchise i.e. the company does not receive the revenue. It is not a process used with the other rail franchises and means Southern have no incentive to make their customers happy. Maybe it's been discussed on here but passed me by completely. The decision to organize the franchise in that manner should, in my opinion, be investigated as it is not in the interests of rail users or the rail industry.

Which is precisely why there is now a crowdfunded application for a judicial review of the government's handling of the situation. £25,000 needed for the full review, £16,000 already in the bank to open up the application.

Reading this thread you'd think that the RMT have been on strike for the whole year, yet the number of strike days up until now has yet to reach double figures. The crap service is down to the company who have been handsomely paid to provide it, failing completely. Sadly their paymasters are quite happy for this situation to carry on for the sake of union bashing.

As has been pointed out ad nauseum the RMT HAVE accepted DOO trains where it is safe to do so and are fighting to retain the guards safety role where it is required. Both ASLEF and the RMT have been able to find agreements with other rail franchises, who funnily enough are reliant on ticket revenue for their income.

The GTR franchise is woefully underresourced and the company have done NOTHING to try and recify this. In fact they have taken every opportunity to weasle out of their responsibility to fulfill the published timetable. Despite recieving dispensation from the government to continually reduce the service with MULTIPLE revised timetables they still FAIL to meet any reasonable punctuality standard. Southern and the DfT are responsible for this mess and they shoud be held to account.

Sadly this has been allowed to run on for so long we are talking round in circles on this thread and I doubt that many opinions are set to be revised by further ranting. For those interested in the role provided by guards do a search on Deadly Danson's posts who has managed to explain the RMT position better than I could.

 

[beorhthelm]

Yes it has been discussed. In short this is the government model that they want to adopt for all other franchises. It has to work from the govt point of view because its their ideology.

their ideology is to have semi-nationalised rail operators? because thats what this GTR arrangement amounts to, outsourcing operations like you might do for the office cleaning or catering. i'm not sure if its a new policy model, an experiment or the best they can do to get private sector to take on the franchise.

and let do it, lets renationalise the railway. does that mean the Dept for Transport and whatever the organisation takes over day to day running of the rail is going to not want DOO? what does nationalisation actually solve?

 

[Gwylan]

and let do it, lets renationalise the railway. does that mean the Dept for Transport and whatever the organisation takes over day to day running of the rail is going to not want DOO? what does nationalisation actually solve?

It would solve the problem, highlighted on this thread, that there's little incentive for a franchise holder to train staff as it's a drain on their resources and, while it's a long term issue, may not be something for the franchisee to worry about. That certainly seems to have been the case in the handover to GTR.

It would also reduce churn. If, as Ernest says, there are a large number of people going to other operators where the pay and conditions are better, it would be better to have a more level playing field. Even if it's not true, it's obvious that having different operators with different pay scales is a recipe for staff disruption.

Nationalisation could also ease the clash between Network Rail and the operators. I see no reason why the separation of services and infrastructure helps anybody, it just leads to a lot of finger pointing.

I agree that nationalisation isn't the answer to everything but it would solve some of the most pressing issues

 

[Ernest]

It would solve the problem, highlighted on this thread, that there's little incentive for a franchise holder to train staff as it's a drain on their resources and, while it's a long term issue, may not be something for the franchisee to worry about. That certainly seems to have been the case in the handover to GTR.

It would also reduce churn. If, as Ernest says, there are a large number of people going to other operators where the pay and conditions are better, it would be better to have a more level playing field. Even if it's not true, it's obvious that having different operators with different pay scales is a recipe for staff disruption.

Nationalisation could also ease the clash between Network Rail and the operators. I see no reason why the separation of services and infrastructure helps anybody, it just leads to a lot of finger pointing.

I agree that nationalisation isn't the answer to everything but it would solve some of the most pressing issues

Or as was suggested at the time have one organisation but have shareholders within it, passengers, staff, maintenance etc so all have a stake in running a successful transport operation instead of faceless bureaucrats running it into the ground or foreign companies siphoning off the cash to subsidise operations elsewhere

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

It would solve the problem, highlighted on this thread, that there's little incentive for a franchise holder to train staff as it's a drain on their resources and, while it's a long term issue, may not be something for the franchisee to worry about. That certainly seems to have been the case in the handover to GTR.

It would also reduce churn. If, as Ernest says, there are a large number of people going to other operators where the pay and conditions are better, it would be better to have a more level playing field. Even if it's not true, it's obvious that having different operators with different pay scales is a recipe for staff disruption.

Nationalisation could also ease the clash between Network Rail and the operators. I see no reason why the separation of services and infrastructure helps anybody, it just leads to a lot of finger pointing.

I agree that nationalisation isn't the answer to everything but it would solve some of the most pressing issues

Nationalization would also enable standards and targets to be set to actually align with the interests of the passengers. At present, on Southern at least, it seems the franchise terms are set and then throughout the contract there is financial incentive to provide the minimum service. If instead, rail managers were incentivized to provide the best possible service for the budget then we would have a better railway. Unions also have to play their part by accepting the budget.

 

[beorhthelm]

Or as was suggested at the time have one organisation but have shareholders within it, passengers, staff, maintenance etc so all have a stake in running a successful transport operation instead of faceless bureaucrats running it into the ground or foreign companies siphoning off the cash to subsidise operations elsewhere

that would seem like a sensbile approach, though one that requires people to accept non-nationalisation to work properly. if its in government control the faceless bureaucrats are still running it, just under a different departmental heading. if we all started to recognise privatised does not mean the same as owned my nasty profit-chasing fiends, we might start to make a consensus on how to run rail (and a bunch of other public services).

Nationalization would also enable standards and targets to be set to actually align with the interests of the passengers. At present, on Southern at least, it seems the franchise terms are set and then throughout the contract there is financial incentive to provide the minimum service. If instead, rail managers were incentivized to provide the best possible service for the budget then we would have a better railway. Unions also have to play their part by accepting the budget.

GTR are currently set targets around revenue protection, passenger satisfaction and service improvement. nice and woolly, but little incentive for them to run the service down. they are already missing first two years of targets and under special measures for last years driver shortages.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

that would seem like a sensbile approach, though one that requires people to accept non-nationalisation to work properly. if its in government control the faceless bureaucrats are still running it, just under a different departmental heading. if we all started to recognise privatised does not mean the same as owned my nasty profit-chasing fiends, we might start to make a consensus on how to run rail (and a bunch of other public services).



GTR are currently set targets around revenue protection, passenger satisfaction and service improvement. nice and woolly, but little incentive for them to run the service down. they are already missing first two years of targets and under special measures for last years driver shortages.

Yes, the suggestion from [MENTION=1416]Ernest[/MENTION] makes sense as well. Privatization is not always a bad option, for example it is difficult to see why the Government would produce cars as it once did so badly. However when providing a public service such as the railway where there is a renewable sale of a monopoly then state control should be considered. If there is profit to be made in railways it should be re-invested. Infrastructure improvement benefits the economy.

 

[yxee]

Whole load new strikes planned.

FIRE THEM ALL gross negligence, bunch of greedy fools. This has NOTHING to do with safety, FACT.

 

[Whitechapel]

Would just like to thank Southern Rail.

After cancelling my train to work twice this week, they've now cancelled my train home too. I've been at Goring station for 45 minutes and counting. Just what you need when you've had a shithouse day at work.

 

[jmsc]

FIRE THEM ALL gross negligence, bunch of greedy fools. This has NOTHING to do with safety, FACT.

Gross negligence? How?
Greedy fools? They're not asking for less hours or more money!
This has NOTHING to do with safety, FACT? What is it about then?

I'm a retired train driver and have a much better grasp of the facts in this dispute than most on NSC.
You seem to have some privileged knowledge that has escaped us mere mortals, please elucidate?

 

[Surf's Up]

How was the East Coast railway operated before Virgin took it over - it always seemed to be quite a good model for how a railway should operate, but then I know nothing about railways so i may be completely wrong?!

 

[Beach Hut]

How was the East Coast railway operated before Virgin took it over - it always seemed to be quite a good model for how a railway should operate, but then I know nothing about railways so i may be completely wrong?!

Zero investment so good profits but now Stagecoach are picking up the tab on behalf go the government

 

[Tony Meolas Loan Spell]

their ideology is to have semi-nationalised rail operators? because thats what this GTR arrangement amounts to, outsourcing operations like you might do for the office cleaning or catering. i'm not sure if its a new policy model, an experiment or the best they can do to get private sector to take on the franchise.

and let do it, lets renationalise the railway. does that mean the Dept for Transport and whatever the organisation takes over day to day running of the rail is going to not want DOO? what does nationalisation actually solve?

Thank you for quoting only a section. How else do you explain why the govt hasnt stepped in on this failing franchise where they have before? Because to do so would admit their ideology on this particular unique franchise arrangement was wrong. Thats the only answer.

 

[pasty]

Something I have noticed recently which sums up train operators for me. I use Abellio Greater Anglia to get from Tottenham Hale to Northumberland Park to work, and recently their announcements have changed from "The next train is the 08:18 service...." to "The next train is the 08:18 train...."

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

Good to see the commuter-led judicial review into the cosy arrangement between GTR and the DfT is moving forward. From this morning's Argus:

http://www.theargus.co.uk/news/1476...ase_details_of_GTR__39_s_franchise_agreement/

Proper questions just starting to be formally asked now. Utterly disgraceful that a proper review has to be forced on the government by the electorate it is failing so spectacularly:



LAWYERS acting on a behalf of a group of commuters have written to the Department for Transport asking if Southern's parent company has breached its franchise agreement.

Working on behalf of the Association of British Commuters, the lawyers are asking for documents relating to Govia Thameslink Railway's franchise agreement to be disclosed.

The organisation - which is fundraising to take the Government to court with a judicial review of the train crisis - said yesterday the request has not been granted so far.

The DfT said it cannot comment while potential legal action is underway.

Emily Yates, campaign co-ordinator, said: "It is hard to understand why they cannot be transparent about their dealings with a private company that is failing on such an unprecedented scale."

Brighton Pavilion MP Caroline Lucas pledge her support to the group which has more than 800 members and has raised more than £17,000 towards its £25,000 target to fund a judicial review into the Government's handling of the Southern Railway crisis.

Mrs Lucas said: "I’m delighted to welcome this initiative from the Association of British Commuters as it gives rail users a key role in holding the Department for Transport to account for the chaos on our railways.

"It’s utterly disgraceful that the Government has allowed the effective collapse of such vital infrastructure, with all the associated impacts on business, tourism and personal well-being.

"I believe that Southern’s parent company GTR is so clearly unfit for purpose that the contract should be taken off them immediately.

"I look forward to working alongside the Association of British Commuters and others towards establishing a rail service that’s run for people not profit."

Donate at crowdjustice.co.uk/case/southernrail.

 

[Ernest]

The TRUTH always comes out

https://itsnotaboutthedoors.wordpress.com/2016/09/25/seaford-sickness-lie-revealed/