Southern rail strike talks to be held on second day of commuter misery

[djfunkdup]

Originally Posted by ianch99

Funniest thing I have read for weeks. Thank you!

Oh look someone with nothing that wants to share it with the world lol

Typical Socialist

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by djfunkdup

Oh look someone with nothing that wants to share it with the world lol

Typical Socialist

Ok, I will run with it, please show me how the Rail Union is "trying to bring down the Government"?

[rocktime]

Rail Union = HYDRA?

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by ianch99

Ok, I will run with it, please show me how the Rail Union is "trying to bring down the Government"?

There is no other rational explanation!

For once, I do partially agree with Arthur. Although it is the responsibility of the company to sort this out, and they are dreadfully inept, the Government should have put them on notice some time ago that if they continued to fail to meet their contractual obligations, the contract would be terminated and re-tendered, and the company would be barred from submitting a tender bid for any railway contract for 10 years.

As far as the company's employment strategy is concerned, why on earth have they continued to pay people who refuse to work normally? They should have terminated existing contracts in line with the termination clause and offered new ones with revised working practice obligations. Anyone not accepting would simply have no contract on the expiry of the existing contract and would no longer be an employee of Southern.

It's very straight forward actually, and I have put such arrangements in place during my previous employment and they worked like a dream. Of course, if the company threatened to change terms and conditions for the worse if they were forced to take that path, they could achieve a return to work a lot quicker and with a lot less hassle.

Of course, this can only work with good management that has a genuine desire to discuss issues with its employees and their representatives with a view to getting an agreement.

And before anyone starts banging on about employee rights, remember that this is a total non-issue. The current dispute is about working practices that are all up and running safely elsewhere. The unions are playing a game but they are doing their members no favours. Their irresponsible attitude will lead to a further tightening of trade union legislation because the unions are using strike action as a means of wearing down a government they don't like.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

There is no other rational explanation!

For once, I do partially agree with Arthur. Although it is the responsibility of the company to sort this out, and they are dreadfully inept, the Government should have put them on notice some time ago that if they continued to fail to meet their contractual obligations, the contract would be terminated and re-tendered, and the company would be barred from submitting a tender bid for any railway contract for 10 years.

As far as the company's employment strategy is concerned, why on earth have they continued to pay people who refuse to work normally? They should have terminated existing contracts in line with the termination clause and offered new ones with revised working practice obligations. Anyone not accepting would simply have no contract on the expiry of the existing contract and would no longer be an employee of Southern.

It's very straight forward actually, and I have put such arrangements in place during my previous employment and they worked like a dream. Of course, if the company threatened to change terms and conditions for the worse if they were forced to take that path, they could achieve a return to work a lot quicker and with a lot less hassle.

Of course, this can only work with good management that has a genuine desire to discuss issues with its employees and their representatives with a view to getting an agreement.

And before anyone starts banging on about employee rights, remember that this is a total non-issue. The current dispute is about working practices that are all up and running safely elsewhere. The unions are playing a game but they are doing their members no favours. Their irresponsible attitude will lead to a further tightening of trade union legislation because the unions are using strike action as a means of wearing down a government they don't like.

Sounds very familiar to anyone who remembers the 1970's...

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

There is no other rational explanation!

For once, I do partially agree with Arthur. Although it is the responsibility of the company to sort this out, and they are dreadfully inept, the Government should have put them on notice some time ago that if they continued to fail to meet their contractual obligations, the contract would be terminated and re-tendered, and the company would be barred from submitting a tender bid for any railway contract for 10 years.

As far as the company's employment strategy is concerned, why on earth have they continued to pay people who refuse to work normally? They should have terminated existing contracts in line with the termination clause and offered new ones with revised working practice obligations. Anyone not accepting would simply have no contract on the expiry of the existing contract and would no longer be an employee of Southern.

It's very straight forward actually, and I have put such arrangements in place during my previous employment and they worked like a dream. Of course, if the company threatened to change terms and conditions for the worse if they were forced to take that path, they could achieve a return to work a lot quicker and with a lot less hassle.

Of course, this can only work with good management that has a genuine desire to discuss issues with its employees and their representatives with a view to getting an agreement.

And before anyone starts banging on about employee rights, remember that this is a total non-issue. The current dispute is about working practices that are all up and running safely elsewhere. The unions are playing a game but they are doing their members no favours. Their irresponsible attitude will lead to a further tightening of trade union legislation because the unions are using strike action as a means of wearing down a government they don't like.

I don't believe it is that simple .Yes we have had driver only trains for years now and the unions are simply using that reason to try to protect their members jobs .Southern have promised that they will keep 2 people on the trains so no jobs will go but after 2020 they can not promise that and the trains will become driver only under the new franchise so those conductors will disappear.The RMT re doing their job ,just not very effectively .
The other point to consider is that the tax payer is paying compensation for lost fares and for season ticket holders because of the weird franchise agreement that GTR(the parent company owning Southern) have.So yes absolutely the government should have stepped in and layed down the law ages ago ,long before it ever got to this stage but they won't because the government want all the franchises to use driver only trains as a means to curtail the power of the unions .

[nomadking]

So the unions are striking over what might happen in 5 or more years time(ie 2021)?

Originally Posted by martyh

The RMT re doing their job ,just not very effectively .
The other point to consider is that the tax payer is paying compensation for lost fares and for season ticket holders because of the weird franchise agreement that GTR(the parent company owning Southern) have.

The absurdity of the deal given to Southern should be a bigger story. What's the point of the franchise system, or privatisation in general, if all the risks and fines are put on the taxpayer and the profits to the franchise? It's just free money to private companies from the government. Remember there was that terrible deal given to First group for the west coast(?) mainline where they were promising cheaper tickets and better services as well as more money to the government which was obviously dodgy to anyone looking at it but it only got stopped after Virgin threatened to take it court and the government 'found their mistake'.

Corrupt as hell.

[Bob]

As someone who gets caught up in this mess as a commuter everyday, here is my 2p.

Ultimately this is all about pay. As soon as conductors are no longer responsible for the safe operation of services, their is a cut in their salary. They have, however, been guaranteed jobs and the same pay for at least four years I think.

They aren't trying to bring down the Government (this would have probably happened with Labour) - they are trying to protect their own jobs. I don't necessarily agree with their approach, but I'm sure how I feel similarly aggrieved in their position. The unions are thinking of the long game, because once those four years are up, it is very likely that that conductors and on-board supervisors will be removed from some services. I don't believe there is a desire to remove them completely.

And then beyond that, we are looking at full automation. It is about to happen on the Thameslink line between St Pancras and Blackfriars following the introduction of new rolling stock on those routes.

It's already in place on the DLR, Northern, Victoria, Central and Jubilee lines on the underground.

The added complication is that this franchise has been run as a management contract due to revenue uncertainties as a result of the Thameslink Programme, due to be completed in 2018 and the Brighton Mainline upgrade works at the end of decade. The Government is taking the financial risk and simply paying Govia to run the system to some agreed KPIs. I assume the Government have taken this an opportunity to force through a modernisation process, using Govia as the face of the changes.

Updated following Damien's post: This was the only way to let the franchise given the risks. It would be not palatable for Conservative government to effectively nationalise a franchise unless they were left with no other choice. But agree, the terms of this particular arrangement don't all seem to be above board given the reluctance to release the full details.

I don't really support the arguments of the unions (aside from an even shoddier service for mobility impaired/disabled passengers potentially) because they are full on contradictions. I read that the leader of ASLEF not more than four years ago said that driver operated doors were perfectly safe on Thameslink - so why is Southern so different?

The Government/Govia aren't doing themselves any favours easier. The franchise has been a shambles for much longer than the current situation and simply blaming the striking union members for the terrible service doesn't really wash.

Rail commuters might like this website: http://www.mytrainjourney.co.uk/

And Mr Grayling needs to grow a pair. It's laughable saying it politicised by the unions when the Government are affectively the paymaster in this. It's kind of unavoidable.

Sacking staff really isn't the answer as it takes at least a year to become fully trained. It's not as it you can suddenly employ a load of new people to fill in.

This still has some time to run, but ultimately the Government are going to win out. It's going to get to the point where staff simply cannot afford to keep striking. Until then, things are going to continue to be a complete and utter shambles.

*removes geeky transport consultancy hat*

---------- Post added at 18:26 ---------- Previous post was at 18:19 ----------

Originally Posted by nomadking

So the unions are striking over what might happen in 5 or more years time(ie 2021)?

As they see it, if they don't do it now, it'll be too late.

I'd like to reiterate I don't agree/disagree with this approach

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Bob

As they see it, if they don't do it now, it'll be too late.

I'd like to reiterate I don't agree/disagree with this approach

How would striking in 5 years time be too late? Other than there being a Labour government at that time.

If it's about the guards, why are the drivers striking?

"The role of the conductor is evolving into the role of the on board supervisor and trains that have a conductor today, will have an on board supervisor rostered on them going forward."
He claimed there will actually be more people on board than there are currently and the on board supervisors will all be safety and security trained.

[Bob]

Originally Posted by nomadking

How would striking in 5 years time be too late? Other than there being a Labour government at that time.

If it's about the guards, why are the drivers striking?

Because accepting the current terms is a slippery slope. They'll be in worse bargain position at a later date. They want to put a stop a stop to 'modernisation' in it's current form, rightly or wrongly.

And presumably a show of solidarity.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Bob

Because accepting the current terms is a slippery slope. They'll be in worse bargain position at a later date. They want to put a stop a stop to 'modernisation' in it's current form, rightly or wrongly.

And presumably a show of solidarity.

If it's "current terms", then they've already accepted them. We're not talking about something that MIGHT happen next week or even next year.

Unions could call an endless series of strikes purely based upon "what ifs".

[Arthurgray50@blu]

I would like to make a couple of points.

The customers themselves has said that one day, when they were told by a reporter told them that there was a strike on.

The customer replied ' the service is that bad, they didn't know that'
This goes to show how bad the company runs it...

The RMT and ASLEF, are there to protect the worker. Like me, l am in the PCS. and they have saved my bacon a few times.

This is why they are there. The rail company are treating the workforce like crap. And it really make me laugh that Grayling still has a job.

This dispute has been going on for months, and Grayling has done nothing. Its just as bad that Corbyn, the **** hasn't got into it

This dispute is over safety, NOT MONEY.

I strongly believe that the Underground, British Railways should ALL have guards.

What happens on a tube train if the driver has a heart attack, or becomes unwell. The train stops in tunnel - what about the passengers. All the safety equipment kicks in and passengers cannot get off the train. And remember the live current is still running, and until such time the Emergency button is on.

Remember the other day, a plane was taking off. And the pilot had a heart attack. The co pilot took the plane back to the departure gate.

That cannot happen on a tube, or ground level train.

Yes, there are emergency measures on trains. BUT we are talking abut several minutes, maybe ten /15 minutes before help arrives.

Buses are different. If the driver becomes ill. He just stops and help is there.

ITS SAFETY.

Get rid of the company. And get a company in that thinks of the public

Originally Posted by Damien

The absurdity of the deal given to Southern should be a bigger story. What's the point of the franchise system, or privatisation in general, if all the risks and fines are put on the taxpayer and the profits to the franchise? It's just free money to private companies from the government. Remember there was that terrible deal given to First group for the west coast(?) mainline where they were promising cheaper tickets and better services as well as more money to the government which was obviously dodgy to anyone looking at it but it only got stopped after Virgin threatened to take it court and the government 'found their mistake'.

Corrupt as hell.

Absolutely agree ,the whole franchise system is a corrupt mess and the sooner it's stopped the better

---------- Post added at 20:48 ---------- Previous post was at 20:42 ----------

Originally Posted by nomadking

If it's "current terms", then they've already accepted them. We're not talking about something that MIGHT happen next week or even next year.

Unions could call an endless series of strikes purely based upon "what ifs".

In this case the unions are calling the strikes because they see it as inevitable that guards are on the way out which means less membership and less power if your the cynical type ,if not then they are trying to protect the jobs of members .Whichever way you see it the government have a lot to answer for because as far as i am concerned they are pulling the strings with GTR

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by martyh

Absolutely agree ,the whole franchise system is a corrupt mess and the sooner it's stopped the better

---------- Post added at 20:48 ---------- Previous post was at 20:42 ----------
In this case the unions are calling the strikes because they see it as inevitable that guards are on the way out which means less membership and less power if your the cynical type ,if not then they are trying to protect the jobs of members .Whichever way you see it the government have a lot to answer for because as far as i am concerned they are pulling the strings with GTR

There is NOTHING that Southern can agree to. 1) They've already agreed to keep them on. 2) After 2021 they don't get a say anyway. 3) 5 years time is hardly "on the way out". 4) As they're actually planning to have MORE people on board, are any jobs actually at risk?

"The role of the conductor is evolving into the role of the on board supervisor and trains that have a conductor today, will have an on board supervisor rostered on them going forward."
He claimed there will actually be more people on board than there are currently and the on board supervisors will all be safety and security trained.