How to fix the Southern Rail dispute?

How to fix the Southern Rail dispute?

Author
Discussion

Cold

Original Poster:

15,207 posts

89 months

Sunday 11th December 2016
quotequote all
The week starts with new round of union initiated disrupted travel for those trying to use the railways in the South of England. Is it a just a question bashing respective heads together in an attempt to move things on from the 1970s, or is there a proper safety issue at stake here?

anonymous-user

53 months

Monday 12th December 2016
quotequote all
I work in the rail industry and it is very difficult to make any changes. I know in other countries they run without train guards, so not really a safety issue.

I think the unions want to protect jobs which is correct, but staging strikes just seems so backwards.

RemyMartin

6,759 posts

204 months

Monday 12th December 2016
quotequote all
It's a backward approach to backwards management.

QED.


Puggit

48,354 posts

247 months

Monday 12th December 2016
quotequote all
Some Southern customers are looking at hiring a train!

Robertj21a

16,475 posts

104 months

Monday 12th December 2016
quotequote all
The railways need to modernise but, on Southern, the (strong) unions think that safety will be compromised if the safety-critical role of the guard is replaced with an 'On Board Supervisor'. What they have failed to properly explain is how 'Thameslink' have operated the same type of train, on the same lines, without a guard for many years !

phatmanace

670 posts

208 months

Monday 12th December 2016
quotequote all
question on this: I read a couple of articles about it this morning - am I reading correctly that 'normal' service only works with people doing overtime, and that even with no strike, if staff work to only core contracted hours that the service is effectively crippled? - or did I misread/misunderstand?

valiant

10,066 posts

159 months

Monday 12th December 2016
quotequote all
phatmanace said:
question on this: I read a couple of articles about it this morning - am I reading correctly that 'normal' service only works with people doing overtime, and that even with no strike, if staff work to only core contracted hours that the service is effectively crippled? - or did I misread/misunderstand?
You'll find it's not that uncommon throughout the rail industry. TOCs like it as it's considerably cheaper than employing more drivers and staff can earn overtime if they wish and when things are normal it can be win-win for all concerned.

Problems start when,for instance, there's a severe bout of sickness and more drivers are off than can be covered with overtime and when industrial relations breakdown, it's easy to put pressure on management by refusing to do overtime whilst not affecting your core pay. I think it was a midland TOC that ran it's entire Sunday through overtime (not the only one) and staff simply refused to volunteer to work due to a dispute and not a single train ran with nothing the company could do.

Personally, I find it incredibly shortsighted of the TOCs to do this as it is just a money saving exercise and does no one any favours in the long run but some TOCs can't see beyond the length of their franchise to do anything about it.

Greshamst

2,028 posts

119 months

Monday 12th December 2016
quotequote all
I don't know enough about unionisation to have an informed opinion on this. But from my perspective I find it ridiculous that thousands of passengers can be held to ransom for months, creating absolute misery and chaos, with very little alternative for those who rely on that trainline everyday, because the staff won't do their job (albeit it because of strike action) and this is allowed to go on without resolution for over half a year.




mcbook

1,384 posts

174 months

Monday 12th December 2016
quotequote all
Judging by reliability and lateness stats it seems that Southern Rail is an incompetent organisation. However, I'm not so sure about this specific issue.

I don't buy the idea that removing the conductor is a safety issue or will adversely impact passengers. In the long-term it might put pressure on jobs though... Future press release: "Southern Rail announce that due to improved CCTV on trains and electronic barriers at stations, only 25% of trains will now have train managers aboard."

As a strategic move by the union it's probably the right one to protect their members in the long term.

Southern Rail really should be able to do a deal that's acceptable to both sides and continue to run a profitable franchise.

Sump

5,484 posts

166 months

Monday 12th December 2016
quotequote all
The easiest solution is to start cutting the employees and heavily invest in automation / wizardry to replace them. There can't be progression if any time we advance someone on minimum wage strikes to hold it back.


rambo19

2,737 posts

136 months

Monday 12th December 2016
quotequote all
Alot of it is also about protecting the T+C's of the drivers/staff.
Which I fully agree with.

greygoose

8,224 posts

194 months

Monday 12th December 2016
quotequote all
I am not sure on the issue of removing guards, on our local line to London most of the smaller stations are unmanned for much of the day so who is going to assist disabled people to get on trains and move the ramps etc. It seems that in many big rail crashes the driver is usually killed so who is going to be there to offer any guidance if the worst happens?

valiant

10,066 posts

159 months

Monday 12th December 2016
quotequote all
Greshamst said:
I don't know enough about unionisation to have an informed opinion on this. But from my perspective I find it ridiculous that thousands of passengers can be held to ransom for months, creating absolute misery and chaos, with very little alternative for those who rely on that trainline everyday, because the staff won't do their job (albeit it because of strike action) and this is allowed to go on without resolution for over half a year.
What about the misery and chaos experienced when the staff weren't on strike?

Southern have been a shambles for far too long, there is no doubt, but to lay the blame solely on the unions is far too simplistic. Both Govia and the DfT are as much to blame for this omnishambles.

There is another Southern thread on here that goes into much more detail and we're at risk of repeating the same arguments so I'd suggest you have a read.smile

phatmanace

670 posts

208 months

Monday 12th December 2016
quotequote all
valiant said:
There is another Southern thread on here that goes into much more detail and we're at risk of repeating the same arguments so I'd suggest you have a read.smile
can you provide a link, I'd be interested to have a read...

Cotty

39,389 posts

283 months

Monday 12th December 2016
quotequote all
Robertj21a said:
What they have failed to properly explain is how 'Thameslink' have operated the same type of train, on the same lines, without a guard for many years !
Dockland Light Railway does not even have drivers. What happens when we get self driving cars, will we need a guard every time we want to go somewhere? silly

valiant

10,066 posts

159 months

Monday 12th December 2016
quotequote all
Cotty said:
Dockland Light Railway does not even have drivers. What happens when we get self driving cars, will we need a guard every time we want to go somewhere? silly
No drivers but there is a passenger service agent aboard every dlr train and as we found out a year or two back, if they go on strike there is no dlr.

gooner1

10,223 posts

178 months

Monday 12th December 2016
quotequote all
Sump said:
The easiest solution is to start cutting the employees and heavily invest in automation / wizardry to replace them. There can't be progression if any time we advance someone on minimum wage strikes to hold it back.
Great idea, cut the number of employees, of which there isn't enough of to run the service now, unless
the staff do overtime.

loafer123

15,404 posts

214 months

Monday 12th December 2016
quotequote all
greygoose said:
I am not sure on the issue of removing guards, on our local line to London most of the smaller stations are unmanned for much of the day so who is going to assist disabled people to get on trains and move the ramps etc. It seems that in many big rail crashes the driver is usually killed so who is going to be there to offer any guidance if the worst happens?
There will still be a second staff member on the train, they just won't be responsible for opertating the doors.

Sump

5,484 posts

166 months

Monday 12th December 2016
quotequote all
gooner1 said:
Sump said:
The easiest solution is to start cutting the employees and heavily invest in automation / wizardry to replace them. There can't be progression if any time we advance someone on minimum wage strikes to hold it back.
Great idea, cut the number of employees, of which there isn't enough of to run the service now, unless
the staff do overtime.
This is why employees should have limited say in how a business should operate / invest.

anonymous-user

53 months

Monday 12th December 2016
quotequote all
Sump said:
gooner1 said:
Sump said:
The easiest solution is to start cutting the employees and heavily invest in automation / wizardry to replace them. There can't be progression if any time we advance someone on minimum wage strikes to hold it back.
Great idea, cut the number of employees, of which there isn't enough of to run the service now, unless
the staff do overtime.
This is why employees should have limited say in how a business should operate / invest.
There aren't enough employees to run a normal schedule. How does cutting the number help?