Southern Rail STRIKE details

[CHAPPERS]

And how Southern spin it: http://www.southernrailway.com/sout...update/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Wow! Horton 'cleared his diary'! What a hero.

 

[Bozza]

An accident happens, a disabled person needs assistance, there is a problem on board like the smoke alarm going off etc

But the RMT accepted, seemingly without objection, other services permanently not having a second member of staff on board.

They really can't have it both ways.

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

Wow! Horton 'cleared his diary'! What a hero.

If there's any justice, Horton will be clearing his desk soon

 

[Ernest]

But the RMT accepted, seemingly without objection, other services permanently not having a second member of staff on board.

They really can't have it both ways.

You better speak to Network Rail who have refused SASTA permission to run DOO trains elsewhere on the network then

 

[Yoda]

Is this so unreasonable?

1. Southern has guaranteed that every train which has a conductor today will have a conductor or on board supervisor in the future. However, on trains where the driver has full control of train, if for any reason an on board supervisor is unavailable we want the flexibility to still run the train for the benefit of our passengers.

2. An example of when we might run without a second person would be at times of disruption if an on-board supervisor was delayed on an inbound train and couldn’t get to his next train on time. In this circumstance we might let the train leave with the no second person, and arrange for an on-board supervisor to join part way through journey at an intermediate station. The RMT would expect us to cancel the train entirely, unnecessarily inconveniencing hundreds of passengers.

That's all very well, but considering they don't employ, enough in the first place that will be 10-20% of their services. What happens as [MENTION=1416]Ernest[/MENTION] says, there is a disabled person on board one of these trains needing to get off at an unmanned station? The smoke detector goes off? It has a much bigger knock on effect with even more delays. What they are proposing is not overall Customer Friendly.

 

[Bozza]

You better speak to Network Rail who have refused SASTA permission to run DOO trains elsewhere on the network then

Why would I? It's not me shouting about safety concerns, whilst ignoring the fact that I forgot about the same concerns elsewhere.

That's all very well, but considering they don't employ, enough in the first place that will be 10-20% of their services. What happens as [MENTION=1416]Ernest[/MENTION] says, there is a disabled person on board one of these trains needing to get off at an unmanned station? The smoke detector goes off? It has a much bigger knock on effect with even more delays. What they are proposing is not overall Customer Friendly.

What do they do on the permanently DOO routes that the RMT allowed to be introduced without hindrance?

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

Same for me for the the just over 1 in 3 who voted for Brexit.

how about the just over 1 in 3 but less than who voted Leave who voted Remain ? Would be fun to swap numbers all day but regarding the railways you all have my sympathy. We have minor irritations up here with Abellio Greater Anglia but I am aghast at what you all have to put up with. The only time it has directly affected me was picking up a family member en route to the Forest game in the absence of a full train service. Surely, the only way to break this impasse is for the Government to intervene and impose a solution.

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

So... it's now all down to the publicly-funded Judicial Review to sort this shit out once and for all and force the relevant hotshots in GTR and DfT to air their very dirty laundry in public. Won't be pretty. Looking forward to the high-level resignations already. Hopefully with a bit of tarring and feathering as they're run out of town on a replacement bus service.

 

[Alex Alex Dawson oo! oo!]

Is this so unreasonable?

1. Southern has guaranteed that every train which has a conductor today will have a conductor or on board supervisor in the future. However, on trains where the driver has full control of train, if for any reason an on board supervisor is unavailable we want the flexibility to still run the train for the benefit of our passengers.

2. An example of when we might run without a second person would be at times of disruption if an on-board supervisor was delayed on an inbound train and couldn’t get to his next train on time. In this circumstance we might let the train leave with the no second person, and arrange for an on-board supervisor to join part way through journey at an intermediate station. The RMT would expect us to cancel the train entirely, unnecessarily inconveniencing hundreds of passengers.

3. There is a full and fair offer on the table that most workers would love to have – a guaranteed job for five years, above-inflation pay increases for the next two years and guaranteed overtime.

So if a disabled person requires assistance on-board or at either station during scenario 2 what should they do? Are Southern going to advise them to get another train, bearing in mind they've required 24 hours advance notice of the trains such a passenger intended to catch? If so, how?
Your third point and tone remind me of BHA's approach to stadium access and travel for disabled fans who don't have a blue badge, miss/ignore fundamental points.

 

[beorhthelm]

No proof them , just the usual loudmouths spouting off rubbish

what do you mean, no proof? the document they claimed as a "memo" written by Horton we know was an extract from a 5 page report written by someone in RSSB. particular amusing lie they spun on that was "there no mention of safety", while in the orignal report its mentioned numerous times.

 

[Bozza]

So if a disabled person requires assistance on-board or at either station during scenario 2 what should they do? Are Southern going to advise them to get another train, bearing in mind they've required 24 hours advance notice of the trains such a passenger intended to catch? If so, how?

Same response I'm afraid: how is it done on the full-on no-second-person-on-board DOO services that the RMT allowed to be introduced?

 

[beorhthelm]

You better speak to Network Rail who have refused SASTA permission to run DOO trains elsewhere on the network then

anywhere else than Brighton Main Line? to be fair, that would be a step forward. if they can just clear trains out of London, picking up displaced guards along the way, that would be improvement to the evening clusterfudges.

though the question is, why are Network Rail refusing permission?

 

[beorhthelm]

So... it's now all down to the publicly-funded Judicial Review to sort this shit out once and for all and force the relevant hotshots in GTR and DfT to air their very dirty laundry in public. Won't be pretty. Looking forward to the high-level resignations already. Hopefully with a bit of tarring and feathering as they're run out of town on a replacement bus service.

think you're putting too much faith in the judical review. i havent seen any final terms of reference for it, but judging by what they had on the fundraising page i dont think that its going to go as far as that. its going to focus on the general service levels, not dig into this dispute and reasons for it.

 

[Ernest]

if they can just clear trains out of London, picking up displaced guards along the way, that would be improvement to the evening clusterfudges.

They already have an agreement to do that and have had so for years

 

[Not Andy Naylor]

There's something I don't understand and I've never seen explained.

If Southern are claiming that who closes the doors is such a minor matter, then why are they insisting on the driver doing it? If there's a conductor on board, why shouldn't they be allowed to do it?

 

[Alex Alex Dawson oo! oo!]

Same response I'm afraid: how is it done on the full-on no-second-person-on-board DOO services that the RMT allowed to be introduced?

You termed Southern's offer as "full and fair", I assumed you'd have looked into the above before making such a statement.

 

[Ernest]

There's something I don't understand and I've never seen explained.

If Southern are claiming that who closes the doors is such a minor matter, then why are they insisting on the driver doing it? If there's a conductor on board, why shouldn't they be allowed to do it?

Because the door business is a red herring which they are using along with the sham sickness allegations to try and win the media battle which unfortunately apart from a few idiots they've now lost. It's about staffing levels and breaking the unions to impose new working practices as Peter Wilkinson helpfully told everyone back in February

 

[Hotchilidog]

So... it's now all down to the publicly-funded Judicial Review to sort this shit out once and for all and force the relevant hotshots in GTR and DfT to air their very dirty laundry in public. Won't be pretty. Looking forward to the high-level resignations already. Hopefully with a bit of tarring and feathering as they're run out of town on a replacement bus service.

I believe court is the only way to bring this to a head as GTR will continue to stick their fingers in their ears ignore everyone and carry on regardless.

This company have proven over a substantial period of time that they are unable to deliver the service for which they have already been paid and they have not been held to account for their shocking performance. For all the wailing and gnashing of teeth over the role of the RMT, the fact remains there has only been 10 days of strike thus far this year whilst the poor levels of service have been omnipresent.

This is a train operator that has published a timetable that it couldn't get with 70% of fulfilling (even on a good day), and has still failed to hit reasonable punctuality targets despite massivley reducing the number of services they have to run on MULTIPLE occasions. The company is short-staffed, poorly run and has not shown one shred of empathy towards the travelling public it inconveniences on a daily basis.

It has been explained ad naueseum that there are circumstances in which DOO could be regarded as safe, and thst there are also circumstances where this is not so. The reasons being lack of suitably equipped trains, lack of station staff and the peculiarities of some the rail infrastructure itself. The company however see fit to ignore these considerations and plough on regardless with the backing of the government.

The union could cave-in tomorrow and give in to GTR but I would not next expect any improvement in the shambolic service provided by this wretched company who seem utterly incapable of running a railway.

I hope that the court action finally reveals the full details of the franchise agreement and whether GTR have been in material breach. When taxpayers money and passenger fares are being used to fund this arrangement there should be no such thing as 'commercial confidentiality'. WE are customer and financiers of this deal and we have the right to know what is going on.

 

[HH Brighton]

The Government wants to damage the unions; the company wants to reduce costs and boost profit; the unions want to prevent any changes to working conditions.
It was a mistake to award them the management contract rather than the frachise because it has removed any incentive on Southern to grow and improve the service providers to commuters.

 

[Bozza]

You termed Southern's offer as "full and fair", I assumed you'd have looked into the above before making such a statement.

No, no I didn't.

Those points 1-3 were lifted directly from the Southern media release, the link to which I was quoting in my post. My only words were "Is this so unreasonable?"

And, again, there are permanently single person services running, and the RMT allowed them to be introduced without all the kerfuffle currently going on with Southern. Did you make the same case against those, as you are now, for those who require additional assistance?