Given up with Southern Rail.
Discussion
legzr1 said:
Stedman said:
Strong management? You need competent management -from top to the very bottom- who know what they're doing that know how to engage with passengers and staff alike!
As a newbie to the industry I have been astounded to see my goodwill thrown back in my face time and time again.
I have a feeling you're wasting your time.As a newbie to the industry I have been astounded to see my goodwill thrown back in my face time and time again.
Edited by Stedman on Saturday 9th July 12:24
Some can't accept the fact that, just maybe, running an essential transport system might be about more than just squeezing every penny out for shareholders.
Just a guess here but do you think this is the beginning of the 'lets hammer the unions' speech made by some junior non-entity transport minister last year?
They were quick to backtrack without denying the plan.
Chrisgr31 said:
V8 Fettler said:
I can see nothing in the so-called informative posts that I have "received" that propose a solution to the current problems on Southern Rail. Lock both sides into a room and don't let them out until it's resolved. Alternatively, if DOO can be demonstrated as reasonably safe then sack the guards make the guards redundant. The latter option needs a strong management team, which is sadly lacking.
So presumably you also want the road network privatised and us to pay a charge for every mile we drive?
http://www.roadusers.org.uk/chapters/infrastructur...
V8 Fettler said:
I want expenditure on roads to equal the tax-take from road users, that's not happened for several decades
http://www.roadusers.org.uk/chapters/infrastructur...
Don't hold your breath... http://www.roadusers.org.uk/chapters/infrastructur...
legzr1 said:
V8 Fettler said:
Are you referring to the unions?
That question tells me more about you and your reasons for commenting on this thread than any of your 'answers'.White noise
I'm more than happy to criticise both sides in this dispute, hence lock both sides in a room until this is resolved. The issue of DOO needs to be closed quickly one way or the other, both sides have lost sight of the most important people: those who pay for the "service".
V8 Fettler said:
Is criticism of the unions and the union mentality now verboten?
No.Go for it.
Looking forward to getting a glimpse of your insight.
'Lock them both in a room' is an excellent start - you have knowledge of the industry and massive experience in industrial relations/disputes so here's hoping your forthcoming suggestions can sort it all out.
Or, Google a nice colourful graph - that always helps.
V8 Fettler said:
legzr1 said:
V8 Fettler said:
Are you referring to the unions?
That question tells me more about you and your reasons for commenting on this thread than any of your 'answers'.White noise
I'm more than happy to criticise both sides in this dispute, hence lock both sides in a room until this is resolved. The issue of DOO needs to be closed quickly one way or the other, both sides have lost sight of the most important people: those who pay for the "service".
This won't be solved any time soon.
This will shock you but as a train driver I pretty abhor ASLEF, their political ideals aren't the same as mine they are monunentally greedy however they also do alot of good and on this issue I back them 100%
Ok, I'll wade in here as a guard.
Reasons to keep a safety critical guard:
1. The single biggest risk for passengers is the Platform Train Interface. A guard observing the departure has far more chance of seeing an issue than the driver does. Several times I've had to stop the train thanks to people trying to board or falling against the train as we began to move.
2. I'm trained in evacuation procedures, basic fire-fighting, basic first aid, know and have access to the emergency equipment on board and can use the GSM-R equipment. I also hold a full PTS (AC & DC lines included). Whilst we cannot anticipate every possible issue, we are trained and are prepared to deal with any issue that arises, to the best of our abilities. This leads on to....
3. ....Accidents.
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploa...
On the 10th July 2010 1C84 hit a tree at high speed near Lavington. In the picture you can see where the tree ended up. If the driver hadn't hit the deck as quickly as he did the tree would have killed him. As it was, the driver was injured, meaning the guard (and other safety-critical members of staff who were travelling passenger) had to take control of the situation.
Had there been nobody else to assume control of the situation, it is entirely possible that passengers would have begun to self-evacuate, with a potentially open line next to them. As the train remained on the rails the first notice anyone else would have had of an issue would have been the next train heading the other way potentially ploughing into a load of passengers who with no guidance or instruction would have tried to self-evac.
This isn't an isolated incident either - this year alone in the South West, there have been four or five trains that have hit trees at speed, including 1C99 (the down Night Riviera) hitting one in the dark near Par.
Before anyone says 'it's ok, I'm sure the driver can manage', bear this accident in mind:
Ufton Nervet, 6th November 2004.
A HST hit a car on the level crossing at high speed. The car driver had parked on the crossing because he wished to commit suicide. He also took Driver Stan Martin and five passengers with him.
Still think only having potentially only one member of staff on board at all is a good idea?
4. Customer Service: Dealing with the public is incredibly frustrating - as the drivers on this thread have pointed out. However, we do try our best. Does anyone honestly think it's a good idea not to have a visible and safety-trained member of staff on board who can deal with passenger issues whilst leaving the driver to get on with concentrating on driving.
5. Preventing Issues Between Passengers: I've lost count of the drunks I've had to deal with, the fights I've broken up and the threatening behaviour that my presence has 'calmed'. As anyone can walk onto a train we have no control over who we carry, but we can stop them causing issues. The driver can't, they can't even see what's going on.
6. Revenue: the lowest priority of a guard - safety and customer service come way above it. Whilst many passengers can (and should) buy tickets before they board the train it is useful for a guard to be able to sell, check and advise on tickets. This is far more efficient than having some lesser-used stations have either staff or ticket machines.
A final picture:
This is about two thirds of the paperwork I need to do my job. I get re-tested on my knowledge every two years, and I undergo periodic extra training and on the job assessments.
In recent years the railway has been very safe - last year we were considered the safest railway network in Europe. When privatisation happened a lot of cost-cutting and corner-cutting resulted in several major accidents in a short space of time (Ladbroke Grove, Potters Bar, etc) it gave the rail industry a collective 'oh f
k' moment. Safety became the absolute priority, and with the exception of Grayrigg in 2007 (Great Heck in 2002 and the aforementioned Ufton Nervet were caused by external factors) we haven't had a major accident since. I honestly think now that the rail industry (and the McNulty report) have looked at recent years and decided we can now go back to cutting training and staffing, having completely forgotten the lessons of 15 years ago.
Reasons to keep a safety critical guard:
1. The single biggest risk for passengers is the Platform Train Interface. A guard observing the departure has far more chance of seeing an issue than the driver does. Several times I've had to stop the train thanks to people trying to board or falling against the train as we began to move.
2. I'm trained in evacuation procedures, basic fire-fighting, basic first aid, know and have access to the emergency equipment on board and can use the GSM-R equipment. I also hold a full PTS (AC & DC lines included). Whilst we cannot anticipate every possible issue, we are trained and are prepared to deal with any issue that arises, to the best of our abilities. This leads on to....
3. ....Accidents.
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploa...
On the 10th July 2010 1C84 hit a tree at high speed near Lavington. In the picture you can see where the tree ended up. If the driver hadn't hit the deck as quickly as he did the tree would have killed him. As it was, the driver was injured, meaning the guard (and other safety-critical members of staff who were travelling passenger) had to take control of the situation.
Had there been nobody else to assume control of the situation, it is entirely possible that passengers would have begun to self-evacuate, with a potentially open line next to them. As the train remained on the rails the first notice anyone else would have had of an issue would have been the next train heading the other way potentially ploughing into a load of passengers who with no guidance or instruction would have tried to self-evac.
This isn't an isolated incident either - this year alone in the South West, there have been four or five trains that have hit trees at speed, including 1C99 (the down Night Riviera) hitting one in the dark near Par.
Before anyone says 'it's ok, I'm sure the driver can manage', bear this accident in mind:
Ufton Nervet, 6th November 2004.
A HST hit a car on the level crossing at high speed. The car driver had parked on the crossing because he wished to commit suicide. He also took Driver Stan Martin and five passengers with him.
Still think only having potentially only one member of staff on board at all is a good idea?
4. Customer Service: Dealing with the public is incredibly frustrating - as the drivers on this thread have pointed out. However, we do try our best. Does anyone honestly think it's a good idea not to have a visible and safety-trained member of staff on board who can deal with passenger issues whilst leaving the driver to get on with concentrating on driving.
5. Preventing Issues Between Passengers: I've lost count of the drunks I've had to deal with, the fights I've broken up and the threatening behaviour that my presence has 'calmed'. As anyone can walk onto a train we have no control over who we carry, but we can stop them causing issues. The driver can't, they can't even see what's going on.
6. Revenue: the lowest priority of a guard - safety and customer service come way above it. Whilst many passengers can (and should) buy tickets before they board the train it is useful for a guard to be able to sell, check and advise on tickets. This is far more efficient than having some lesser-used stations have either staff or ticket machines.
A final picture:
This is about two thirds of the paperwork I need to do my job. I get re-tested on my knowledge every two years, and I undergo periodic extra training and on the job assessments.
In recent years the railway has been very safe - last year we were considered the safest railway network in Europe. When privatisation happened a lot of cost-cutting and corner-cutting resulted in several major accidents in a short space of time (Ladbroke Grove, Potters Bar, etc) it gave the rail industry a collective 'oh f
k' moment. Safety became the absolute priority, and with the exception of Grayrigg in 2007 (Great Heck in 2002 and the aforementioned Ufton Nervet were caused by external factors) we haven't had a major accident since. I honestly think now that the rail industry (and the McNulty report) have looked at recent years and decided we can now go back to cutting training and staffing, having completely forgotten the lessons of 15 years ago. Couple of years now, my dismay in aslef is fairly localised to my TOC and sheer craziness and long drawn out plans to do with new traction, Driver tablets and lots of other stuff that is important with no real communication other than 'minutes' plus also how they have assisted a friend of mine post SPAD.
There is no real talking to members and putting forward proposals to management in regards to 'harmonisation' which has resulted from two TOCS being one and lots of different T&Cs between drivers of the same company!
There is no real talking to members and putting forward proposals to management in regards to 'harmonisation' which has resulted from two TOCS being one and lots of different T&Cs between drivers of the same company!
RemyMartin said:
Couple of years now, my dismay in aslef is fairly localised to my TOC and sheer craziness and long drawn out plans to do with new traction, Driver tablets and lots of other stuff that is important with no real communication other than 'minutes' plus also how they have assisted a friend of mine post SPAD.
There is no real talking to members and putting forward proposals to management in regards to 'harmonisation' which has resulted from two TOCS being one and lots of different T&Cs between drivers of the same company!
Political slant aside (you're probably aware of political levy opt out) I tend to agree with your assessment of ASLEF - there are lots I've disagreed with over the years but, all things considered, they get the main things right and safety concerns are quite rightly at the top of the agenda.There is no real talking to members and putting forward proposals to management in regards to 'harmonisation' which has resulted from two TOCS being one and lots of different T&Cs between drivers of the same company!
I've found that local issues normally come down to the ability of the local reps - get a good one and things can run smoothly. Get a bad one...
Get to the meetings if/when you can and be vocal.
SWTH said:
Ok, I'll wade in here as a guard.
Reasons to keep a safety critical guard:
1. The single biggest risk for passengers is the Platform Train Interface. A guard observing the departure has far more chance of seeing an issue than the driver does. Several times I've had to stop the train thanks to people trying to board or falling against the train as we began to move.
2. I'm trained in evacuation procedures, basic fire-fighting, basic first aid, know and have access to the emergency equipment on board and can use the GSM-R equipment. I also hold a full PTS (AC & DC lines included). Whilst we cannot anticipate every possible issue, we are trained and are prepared to deal with any issue that arises, to the best of our abilities. This leads on to....
3. ....Accidents.
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploa...
On the 10th July 2010 1C84 hit a tree at high speed near Lavington. In the picture you can see where the tree ended up. If the driver hadn't hit the deck as quickly as he did the tree would have killed him. As it was, the driver was injured, meaning the guard (and other safety-critical members of staff who were travelling passenger) had to take control of the situation.
Had there been nobody else to assume control of the situation, it is entirely possible that passengers would have begun to self-evacuate, with a potentially open line next to them. As the train remained on the rails the first notice anyone else would have had of an issue would have been the next train heading the other way potentially ploughing into a load of passengers who with no guidance or instruction would have tried to self-evac.
This isn't an isolated incident either - this year alone in the South West, there have been four or five trains that have hit trees at speed, including 1C99 (the down Night Riviera) hitting one in the dark near Par.
Before anyone says 'it's ok, I'm sure the driver can manage', bear this accident in mind:
Ufton Nervet, 6th November 2004.
A HST hit a car on the level crossing at high speed. The car driver had parked on the crossing because he wished to commit suicide. He also took Driver Stan Martin and five passengers with him.
Still think only having potentially only one member of staff on board at all is a good idea?
4. Customer Service: Dealing with the public is incredibly frustrating - as the drivers on this thread have pointed out. However, we do try our best. Does anyone honestly think it's a good idea not to have a visible and safety-trained member of staff on board who can deal with passenger issues whilst leaving the driver to get on with concentrating on driving.
5. Preventing Issues Between Passengers: I've lost count of the drunks I've had to deal with, the fights I've broken up and the threatening behaviour that my presence has 'calmed'. As anyone can walk onto a train we have no control over who we carry, but we can stop them causing issues. The driver can't, they can't even see what's going on.
6. Revenue: the lowest priority of a guard - safety and customer service come way above it. Whilst many passengers can (and should) buy tickets before they board the train it is useful for a guard to be able to sell, check and advise on tickets. This is far more efficient than having some lesser-used stations have either staff or ticket machines.
A final picture:
This is about two thirds of the paperwork I need to do my job. I get re-tested on my knowledge every two years, and I undergo periodic extra training and on the job assessments.
In recent years the railway has been very safe - last year we were considered the safest railway network in Europe. When privatisation happened a lot of cost-cutting and corner-cutting resulted in several major accidents in a short space of time (Ladbroke Grove, Potters Bar, etc) it gave the rail industry a collective 'oh fk' moment. Safety became the absolute priority, and with the exception of Grayrigg in 2007 (Great Heck in 2002 and the aforementioned Ufton Nervet were caused by external factors) we haven't had a major accident since. I honestly think now that the rail industry (and the McNulty report) have looked at recent years and decided we can now go back to cutting training and staffing, having completely forgotten the lessons of 15 years ago.
Excellent post.Reasons to keep a safety critical guard:
1. The single biggest risk for passengers is the Platform Train Interface. A guard observing the departure has far more chance of seeing an issue than the driver does. Several times I've had to stop the train thanks to people trying to board or falling against the train as we began to move.
2. I'm trained in evacuation procedures, basic fire-fighting, basic first aid, know and have access to the emergency equipment on board and can use the GSM-R equipment. I also hold a full PTS (AC & DC lines included). Whilst we cannot anticipate every possible issue, we are trained and are prepared to deal with any issue that arises, to the best of our abilities. This leads on to....
3. ....Accidents.
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploa...
On the 10th July 2010 1C84 hit a tree at high speed near Lavington. In the picture you can see where the tree ended up. If the driver hadn't hit the deck as quickly as he did the tree would have killed him. As it was, the driver was injured, meaning the guard (and other safety-critical members of staff who were travelling passenger) had to take control of the situation.
Had there been nobody else to assume control of the situation, it is entirely possible that passengers would have begun to self-evacuate, with a potentially open line next to them. As the train remained on the rails the first notice anyone else would have had of an issue would have been the next train heading the other way potentially ploughing into a load of passengers who with no guidance or instruction would have tried to self-evac.
This isn't an isolated incident either - this year alone in the South West, there have been four or five trains that have hit trees at speed, including 1C99 (the down Night Riviera) hitting one in the dark near Par.
Before anyone says 'it's ok, I'm sure the driver can manage', bear this accident in mind:
Ufton Nervet, 6th November 2004.
A HST hit a car on the level crossing at high speed. The car driver had parked on the crossing because he wished to commit suicide. He also took Driver Stan Martin and five passengers with him.
Still think only having potentially only one member of staff on board at all is a good idea?
4. Customer Service: Dealing with the public is incredibly frustrating - as the drivers on this thread have pointed out. However, we do try our best. Does anyone honestly think it's a good idea not to have a visible and safety-trained member of staff on board who can deal with passenger issues whilst leaving the driver to get on with concentrating on driving.
5. Preventing Issues Between Passengers: I've lost count of the drunks I've had to deal with, the fights I've broken up and the threatening behaviour that my presence has 'calmed'. As anyone can walk onto a train we have no control over who we carry, but we can stop them causing issues. The driver can't, they can't even see what's going on.
6. Revenue: the lowest priority of a guard - safety and customer service come way above it. Whilst many passengers can (and should) buy tickets before they board the train it is useful for a guard to be able to sell, check and advise on tickets. This is far more efficient than having some lesser-used stations have either staff or ticket machines.
A final picture:
This is about two thirds of the paperwork I need to do my job. I get re-tested on my knowledge every two years, and I undergo periodic extra training and on the job assessments.
In recent years the railway has been very safe - last year we were considered the safest railway network in Europe. When privatisation happened a lot of cost-cutting and corner-cutting resulted in several major accidents in a short space of time (Ladbroke Grove, Potters Bar, etc) it gave the rail industry a collective 'oh f
k' moment. Safety became the absolute priority, and with the exception of Grayrigg in 2007 (Great Heck in 2002 and the aforementioned Ufton Nervet were caused by external factors) we haven't had a major accident since. I honestly think now that the rail industry (and the McNulty report) have looked at recent years and decided we can now go back to cutting training and staffing, having completely forgotten the lessons of 15 years ago. legzr1 said:
Political slant aside (you're probably aware of political levy opt out) I tend to agree with your assessment of ASLEF - there are lots I've disagreed with over the years but, all things considered, they get the main things right and safety concerns are quite rightly at the top of the agenda.
I've found that local issues normally come down to the ability of the local reps - get a good one and things can run smoothly. Get a bad one...
Get to the meetings if/when you can and be vocal.
In essence. It's local reps that are the issue here.I've found that local issues normally come down to the ability of the local reps - get a good one and things can run smoothly. Get a bad one...
Get to the meetings if/when you can and be vocal.
legzr1 said:
V8 Fettler said:
Is criticism of the unions and the union mentality now verboten?
No.Go for it.
Looking forward to getting a glimpse of your insight.
'Lock them both in a room' is an excellent start - you have knowledge of the industry and massive experience in industrial relations/disputes so here's hoping your forthcoming suggestions can sort it all out.
Or, Google a nice colourful graph - that always helps.
From the customer's viewpoint, the passenger rail network should be managed as a performance contract. How the contractor manages the workforce should be of no concern to the customer, hence lock the contractor's management team and the "workers' representatives" into a room until it's resolved.
Let me know if you need any assistance in understanding the data described by the graph.
RemyMartin said:
V8 Fettler said:
legzr1 said:
V8 Fettler said:
Are you referring to the unions?
That question tells me more about you and your reasons for commenting on this thread than any of your 'answers'.White noise
I'm more than happy to criticise both sides in this dispute, hence lock both sides in a room until this is resolved. The issue of DOO needs to be closed quickly one way or the other, both sides have lost sight of the most important people: those who pay for the "service".
This won't be solved any time soon.
This will shock you but as a train driver I pretty abhor ASLEF, their political ideals aren't the same as mine they are monunentally greedy however they also do alot of good and on this issue I back them 100%
If DOO is reasonably safe then it needs to be introduced ASAP. Is there not an independent expert's report on DOO? If not then the TOC needs to be kicked until such a report is available.
Having seen your attempts to prove your opinion to be correct despite experts thoroughly debunking your statements in other threads (the QE/carrier thread for example), I doubt anything that those of us employed in the rail industry say here will be taken on board or listened to.
Anyway, DOO. Safe, is it?
Hayes & Harlington RAIB report
Anyway, DOO. Safe, is it?
Hayes & Harlington RAIB report
I'm just posting here to bh and moan about Thameslink.
Last 3 trains I've got in the morning have been shortformed from 8 to 4 coaches. Today the obviously annoyed driver announced 'Sorry for the shortforming of this train, I don't know why it is'.
Seems like the excuse used the most is due to broken down trains. In the meantime I'm still paying over £3k to a company that don't seem able to keep the trains that they use in working order. You'd think a high priority of a train company would be to you know, have trains that worked.
h and moan about Thameslink.Last 3 trains I've got in the morning have been shortformed from 8 to 4 coaches. Today the obviously annoyed driver announced 'Sorry for the shortforming of this train, I don't know why it is'.
Seems like the excuse used the most is due to broken down trains. In the meantime I'm still paying over £3k to a company that don't seem able to keep the trains that they use in working order. You'd think a high priority of a train company would be to you know, have trains that worked.
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff