How to fix the Southern Rail dispute?
Discussion
NDA said:
The RSSB (Rail Safety and Standards Board) says there is no evidence that drivers (rather than guards) operating train doors increases the risk of passenger harm.
The ORR have also made comment:
http://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0014/2330...
Sounds like someone is being defensive.
Well if you have a look at the board of the RSSB you will find it is lead by the leaders of the Train and Freight Operating Companies. Some might suggest they have a vested interest.The ORR have also made comment:
http://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0014/2330...
Sounds like someone is being defensive.
The reality is that there are relatively few dispatch incidents but those involving drivers appear to take place at quiet times. My suspicion is that this is because drivers may pay less attention when its quiet as they think no one is around. In addition because there is no one around there are not other passengers around to help free trapped people items. Virtually every tube journey sees passengers forcing doors to free something and similar happens on very busy mainline trains too,
The dispatch incidents involving guards are also relatively easy to explain. The one in Liverpool for example. In this case he dispatched a train with someone leaning on it. Whats the bedding that this is a regular occurence and lots of other guards have done it as otherwise the train is going nowhere.
frankenstein12 said:
Are you going to tell me that driving a train is any more difficult than driving a car? Or a taxi?
Regardless of ease of the job my primary issue as I have repeatedly said is that the unions and workers keep striking over conditions and making it about pay at the same time.
Frankly train drivers get paid damn well for what they do and its foolish to kid themselves otherwise.
If safety is an issue then they should strike over safety and not make it about pay "and conditions".
Most people are aware of how much train drivers are paid and a lot of people would love to be paid what train drivers are and therefore rightly get extremely angry when train drivers go on strike causing chaos due to pay "and conditions" and then only go back to work after they get a huge pay rise.
I don't need a job as a train driver and am not jealous as others on here seem to think as I am paid not far off what train drivers are anyway.
I rarely ever use the train for the simple reason of cost and convenience. It is cheaper and often faster for me to drive where I need to go and yes I know it is not the drivers fault for the ticket prices but their constant striking means its simply not reasonable to rely on trains.
Regardless of ease of the job my primary issue as I have repeatedly said is that the unions and workers keep striking over conditions and making it about pay at the same time.
Frankly train drivers get paid damn well for what they do and its foolish to kid themselves otherwise.
If safety is an issue then they should strike over safety and not make it about pay "and conditions".
Most people are aware of how much train drivers are paid and a lot of people would love to be paid what train drivers are and therefore rightly get extremely angry when train drivers go on strike causing chaos due to pay "and conditions" and then only go back to work after they get a huge pay rise.
I don't need a job as a train driver and am not jealous as others on here seem to think as I am paid not far off what train drivers are anyway.
I rarely ever use the train for the simple reason of cost and convenience. It is cheaper and often faster for me to drive where I need to go and yes I know it is not the drivers fault for the ticket prices but their constant striking means its simply not reasonable to rely on trains.
So you get paid nearly the same as a train driver but opt to use the cheapeste way to travel.
Skinflint springs to mind.
gooner1 said:
So you get paid nearly the same as a train driver but opt to use the cheapeste way to travel.
Skinflint springs to mind.
In less than 12 hours he's joined a union, negotiated a settlememt and significantly improved his salary.
Or he hasn't a clue wtf he's talking about.
Still hasn't let on what his job is either...
It's not the first time we've had this. It won't be the last.
Some people think they are better and have more worth than others.
As ever, it comes down to envy.
https://youtu.be/1giVzxyoclE?t=2m
Some people think they are better and have more worth than others.
As ever, it comes down to envy.
https://youtu.be/1giVzxyoclE?t=2m
gooner1 said:
frankenstein12 said:
Are you going to tell me that driving a train is any more difficult than driving a car? Or a taxi?
Regardless of ease of the job my primary issue as I have repeatedly said is that the unions and workers keep striking over conditions and making it about pay at the same time.
Frankly train drivers get paid damn well for what they do and its foolish to kid themselves otherwise.
If safety is an issue then they should strike over safety and not make it about pay "and conditions".
Most people are aware of how much train drivers are paid and a lot of people would love to be paid what train drivers are and therefore rightly get extremely angry when train drivers go on strike causing chaos due to pay "and conditions" and then only go back to work after they get a huge pay rise.
I don't need a job as a train driver and am not jealous as others on here seem to think as I am paid not far off what train drivers are anyway.
I rarely ever use the train for the simple reason of cost and convenience. It is cheaper and often faster for me to drive where I need to go and yes I know it is not the drivers fault for the ticket prices but their constant striking means its simply not reasonable to rely on trains.
Regardless of ease of the job my primary issue as I have repeatedly said is that the unions and workers keep striking over conditions and making it about pay at the same time.
Frankly train drivers get paid damn well for what they do and its foolish to kid themselves otherwise.
If safety is an issue then they should strike over safety and not make it about pay "and conditions".
Most people are aware of how much train drivers are paid and a lot of people would love to be paid what train drivers are and therefore rightly get extremely angry when train drivers go on strike causing chaos due to pay "and conditions" and then only go back to work after they get a huge pay rise.
I don't need a job as a train driver and am not jealous as others on here seem to think as I am paid not far off what train drivers are anyway.
I rarely ever use the train for the simple reason of cost and convenience. It is cheaper and often faster for me to drive where I need to go and yes I know it is not the drivers fault for the ticket prices but their constant striking means its simply not reasonable to rely on trains.
So you get paid nearly the same as a train driver but opt to use the cheapeste way to travel.
Skinflint springs to mind.
Well when they make it economically sensible I will.
rs1952 said:
Robertj21a said:
But I do need to respond further to this:
I'm not sure there is any difference between our views but I may have misunderstood what you are saying. If you take, say, Stagecoach or First Group, my assumption is that the train drivers have achieved their significant salaries largely through the efforts of ASLEF over many years. The job takes a considerable period of time to train to an acceptable standard and ASLEF seems very effective at recruiting members.Robertj21a said:
If you look at my original point I made one simple point about other people who might be happy to do the job for, say, £30,000. I see no reason to change that view as I'm sure it's factually true. It would be for the TOC/trainer to see whether they could attain the necessary standards.
Here was my reply, and I see no reason to change my view either:rs1952 said:
So you ought really to ask yourself a fundamental question. If the same companies are involved in both bus and railway undertakings, and they have managed to reduce wages in one sector, why have they not managed to do it in the other?
If you take the same companies and look at their bus drivers, their pay is (in my view) comparatively poor. The job does not take so long to learn and many are represented by what I might call 'poorer quality' unions. It's not a question of reducing the wages in one sector, rather not increasing them by such large percentages.
Isn't the reason for the relatively high train driver salaries largely down to ASLEF ?
frankenstein12 said:
Actually incorrect. Trains should be cheaper than using a car. The government keep trying to convince the public to use public transport and to ditch their nasty polluting cars.
Well when they make it economically sensible I will.
Now that depends on how you cost it.Well when they make it economically sensible I will.
OK I admit that I have a Senior Railcard so I get one-third off, but my average fare is about 12 pence per mile (it varies of course with selective pricing). Without a railcard it would cost an average of 18 pence per mile.
Fuel alone for my car averages about 13.4 pence per mile, to which must be added repair and maintenance costs (its an old car so these might be higher than normal) which in my case amount to about the same when expressed as pence per mile. So now I'm up to 26.8 pence per mile.
I don't have a car loan - many do - that needs taking into account in the costings if it applies to you. Depreciation too but if, like me, you are driving a 1998 Merc 250TD or anything of a similar age, depreciation isn't going to worry you. If, however, loans and depreciation do apply in your case, then expressing that in terms of pence per mile would take you way over the 13.4ppm I'm allowing for repairs and maintenance.
Then when you drive somewhere, you have to park the thing at the other end. Whilst it is of course possible to park your car for nothing on a road, not many unrestricted ones are left in the places most people want to go ie. the centre of towns and cities. Of course, that might not count if you need to drive to your local station and pay to park when you get there.
Depending on where you want to go, sometimes it can be quicker to drive but not always and, if you're going to time it, don't forget to add in the time for congestion delays and] or finding a parking space. In my old pre-railcard days and when there were still kids around the place, if I wanted to go to London I'd drive up to Hayes & Harlington station (just off the M4 at Heathrow) and go in to Paddington on a local train from there. One day as I was arriving at Paddington for a local train back there was an express train for home leaving at much the same time. So I timed it - "if I was on the express I'd be home at such-and-such a time, after walking up from the station (always assuming the express was on time of course)" I actually got home after going back to Hayes and driving 90 miles down the M4 seventeen minutes slower than if I'd caught the express train. So not much in it then...
So in summary, if there is only one you doing the trip, it is probably cheaper by train when you take all factors into account.
All that said, the dice comes down heavily in favour of private transport when there is more than one of you going, and of course in the convenience of being able to go door to door at exactly the time you want to go. There is also the little matter that, post-Beeching, there are vast swathes of the country nowhere near a railway and even more swathes near a railway but nowhere near a station. That too of course is a major consideration if it applies to you but, even after Beeching, most major towns and cities are still rail connected.
So I think your final sentence "when they make it economically sensible I will" might not be looking at the whole picture.
rs1952 said:
Now that depends on how you cost it.
OK I admit that I have a Senior Railcard so I get one-third off, but my average fare is about 12 pence per mile (it varies of course with selective pricing). Without a railcard it would cost an average of 18 pence per mile.
Fuel alone for my car averages about 13.4 pence per mile, to which must be added repair and maintenance costs (its an old car so these might be higher than normal) which in my case amount to about the same when expressed as pence per mile. So now I'm up to 26.8 pence per mile.
I don't have a car loan - many do - that needs taking into account in the costings if it applies to you. Depreciation too but if, like me, you are driving a 1998 Merc 250TD or anything of a similar age, depreciation isn't going to worry you. If, however, loans and depreciation do apply in your case, then expressing that in terms of pence per mile would take you way over the 13.4ppm I'm allowing for repairs and maintenance.
Then when you drive somewhere, you have to park the thing at the other end. Whilst it is of course possible to park your car for nothing on a road, not many unrestricted ones are left in the places most people want to go ie. the centre of towns and cities. Of course, that might not count if you need to drive to your local station and pay to park when you get there.
Depending on where you want to go, sometimes it can be quicker to drive but not always and, if you're going to time it, don't forget to add in the time for congestion delays and] or finding a parking space. In my old pre-railcard days and when there were still kids around the place, if I wanted to go to London I'd drive up to Hayes & Harlington station (just off the M4 at Heathrow) and go in to Paddington on a local train from there. One day as I was arriving at Paddington for a local train back there was an express train for home leaving at much the same time. So I timed it - "if I was on the express I'd be home at such-and-such a time, after walking up from the station (always assuming the express was on time of course)" I actually got home after going back to Hayes and driving 90 miles down the M4 seventeen minutes slower than if I'd caught the express train. So not much in it then...
So in summary, if there is only one you doing the trip, it is probably cheaper by train when you take all factors into account.
All that said, the dice comes down heavily in favour of private transport when there is more than one of you going, and of course in the convenience of being able to go door to door at exactly the time you want to go. There is also the little matter that, post-Beeching, there are vast swathes of the country nowhere near a railway and even more swathes near a railway but nowhere near a station. That too of course is a major consideration if it applies to you but, even after Beeching, most major towns and cities are still rail connected.
So I think your final sentence "when they make it economically sensible I will" might not be looking at the whole picture.
Actually within reason I have.OK I admit that I have a Senior Railcard so I get one-third off, but my average fare is about 12 pence per mile (it varies of course with selective pricing). Without a railcard it would cost an average of 18 pence per mile.
Fuel alone for my car averages about 13.4 pence per mile, to which must be added repair and maintenance costs (its an old car so these might be higher than normal) which in my case amount to about the same when expressed as pence per mile. So now I'm up to 26.8 pence per mile.
I don't have a car loan - many do - that needs taking into account in the costings if it applies to you. Depreciation too but if, like me, you are driving a 1998 Merc 250TD or anything of a similar age, depreciation isn't going to worry you. If, however, loans and depreciation do apply in your case, then expressing that in terms of pence per mile would take you way over the 13.4ppm I'm allowing for repairs and maintenance.
Then when you drive somewhere, you have to park the thing at the other end. Whilst it is of course possible to park your car for nothing on a road, not many unrestricted ones are left in the places most people want to go ie. the centre of towns and cities. Of course, that might not count if you need to drive to your local station and pay to park when you get there.
Depending on where you want to go, sometimes it can be quicker to drive but not always and, if you're going to time it, don't forget to add in the time for congestion delays and] or finding a parking space. In my old pre-railcard days and when there were still kids around the place, if I wanted to go to London I'd drive up to Hayes & Harlington station (just off the M4 at Heathrow) and go in to Paddington on a local train from there. One day as I was arriving at Paddington for a local train back there was an express train for home leaving at much the same time. So I timed it - "if I was on the express I'd be home at such-and-such a time, after walking up from the station (always assuming the express was on time of course)" I actually got home after going back to Hayes and driving 90 miles down the M4 seventeen minutes slower than if I'd caught the express train. So not much in it then...
So in summary, if there is only one you doing the trip, it is probably cheaper by train when you take all factors into account.
All that said, the dice comes down heavily in favour of private transport when there is more than one of you going, and of course in the convenience of being able to go door to door at exactly the time you want to go. There is also the little matter that, post-Beeching, there are vast swathes of the country nowhere near a railway and even more swathes near a railway but nowhere near a station. That too of course is a major consideration if it applies to you but, even after Beeching, most major towns and cities are still rail connected.
So I think your final sentence "when they make it economically sensible I will" might not be looking at the whole picture.
A case study in point.
A few weeks ago my car broke and I had to go visit a customer in London the next day.
I checked the train timetable and found i could get to my customer using the trains in around about the same time as I knew it normally takes me by car.
I then checked how much a ticket was which given I didnt need to be at my customers till 11am meant I could leave after 9am when the fares drop to off peak.
An off peak day return was iirc £43.
I then called a few car hire companies.
A local car hire company was able to supply me with a brand new ford fiesta for £27 for a days hire.
I decided it would probability cost me no more than £15 in petrol to drive to london and back as my 2.8 litre costs me around £20 for the same trip.
All in i spent £40 on the trip using a hire car which was £3 cheaper than the train during off peak.
On top of that it allowed me the flexibility to come and go as i pleased and if i had wanted i could have visited another customer or done some shopping etc.
A season ticket to london from where i live opposite the train station is £6500 IIRC.
My car insurance is +-£450 a year.
Tax is £280
Maintenance variable but around £2000 a year including 6 tyres per year 2 sets rear one set front, brakes, servicing etc.
Fuel??? £2880 roughly
So i come out about £1000 better off roughly plus the convenience of a car obviously.
Robertj21a said:
I'm not sure there is any difference between our views but I may have misunderstood what you are saying. If you take, say, Stagecoach or First Group, my assumption is that the train drivers have achieved their significant salaries largely through the efforts of ASLEF over many years. The job takes a considerable period of time to train to an acceptable standard and ASLEF seems very effective at recruiting members.
If you take the same companies and look at their bus drivers, their pay is (in my view) comparatively poor. The job does not take so long to learn and many are represented by what I might call 'poorer quality' unions. It's not a question of reducing the wages in one sector, rather not increasing them by such large percentages.
Isn't the reason for the relatively high train driver salaries largely down to ASLEF ?
I don't personally think so. ASLEF can be a "vocal" union but, in common with all the others, their power has diminished over the years through legislation, the abolition of the closed shop, and also the strict promotional arrangements that once applied. In the days of steam there was only one route to being a driver - you started as an engine cleaner, were promoted to fireman and then to driver. The concept of Traction Trainee was introduced in the 1970s which opened the field up to others, both to people outside of the industry and insiders from other grades. If you take the same companies and look at their bus drivers, their pay is (in my view) comparatively poor. The job does not take so long to learn and many are represented by what I might call 'poorer quality' unions. It's not a question of reducing the wages in one sector, rather not increasing them by such large percentages.
Isn't the reason for the relatively high train driver salaries largely down to ASLEF ?
One driver I see monthly at the retired staff gathering is not yet retired, but started his railway career as a platelayer shovelling ballast. He went on the course and has been driving for 20+ years. Such a move would have been unheard of 40 years ago. He also retained his NUR/ RMT membership. Another retired driver from Huddersfield who I see once in a blue moon started working for the Romney Hythe & Dymchurch Railway in Kent, then became a BR guard and went on to end his service for 15 or so years as a driver. He also retained RMT membership until the end.
The drivers on here can give you a better up-to-date picture, but my take on it is as follows. At around the time of privatisation the "link" system, which split drivers up by seniority (and also meant that the most senior men in the top link got all the plum jobs) was scrapped and mileage bonus payments were abolished. That consolidation effectively meant that more junior drivers were brought up to the pay levels of the senior men.
There was also a typical British cock-up around the time of privatisation, although to be fair someone would have needed a crystal ball to see it coming. With total railway train mileage at best flat-lining and usually diminishing since the 1960s, and a policy of (generally) no compulsory redundancy, in many areas BR had more drivers than they knew what to do with. A lot of these men (as men they were - female engine drivers didn't appear on the scene until after the Sex Discrimination Act 1975) were encouraged to leave the service at that time.
Then almost immediately, and contrary to Whitehall's view that privatisation would see off the railways for good (which is why the franchises were set up in the way they were), railway traffic started its exponential growth to the situation we have today that the railways are carrying more passengers than they have at any time since railways were invented. So now there was a severe shortage of drivers but the TOCs had just got shot of battalions of them, training new ones took 18 months, and not all trainees who get on the course manage to complete it. Market forces kicked in - "I'm a driver and you haven't got enough drivers, so let's talk money."
As others have said on this thread, many TOCs tried to poach drivers from other TOCs rather than train new starters themselves, and that was another factor that pushed the salaries up.
I am sure that there were further factors that others might like to mention.
By the way, as you didn't say anything shall I assume that your username has got nothing to do with Saltley?
https://www.flickr.com/photos/24041160@N02/5374830...
frankenstein12 said:
Actually within reason I have.
A case study in point.
A few weeks ago my car broke and I had to go visit a customer in London the next day.
I checked the train timetable and found i could get to my customer using the trains in around about the same time as I knew it normally takes me by car.
I then checked how much a ticket was which given I didnt need to be at my customers till 11am meant I could leave after 9am when the fares drop to off peak.
An off peak day return was iirc £43.
I then called a few car hire companies.
A local car hire company was able to supply me with a brand new ford fiesta for £27 for a days hire.
I decided it would probability cost me no more than £15 in petrol to drive to london and back as my 2.8 litre costs me around £20 for the same trip.
All in i spent £40 on the trip using a hire car which was £3 cheaper than the train during off peak.
On top of that it allowed me the flexibility to come and go as i pleased and if i had wanted i could have visited another customer or done some shopping etc.
A season ticket to london from where i live opposite the train station is £6500 IIRC.
My car insurance is +-£450 a year.
Tax is £280
Maintenance variable but around £2000 a year including 6 tyres per year 2 sets rear one set front, brakes, servicing etc.
Fuel??? £2880 roughly
So i come out about £1000 better off roughly plus the convenience of a car obviously.
Whilst I agree with you in all of your points. Sometimes it’s nicer to pay the bit extra and have time to relax or work and just generally be free of driving something. A case study in point.
A few weeks ago my car broke and I had to go visit a customer in London the next day.
I checked the train timetable and found i could get to my customer using the trains in around about the same time as I knew it normally takes me by car.
I then checked how much a ticket was which given I didnt need to be at my customers till 11am meant I could leave after 9am when the fares drop to off peak.
An off peak day return was iirc £43.
I then called a few car hire companies.
A local car hire company was able to supply me with a brand new ford fiesta for £27 for a days hire.
I decided it would probability cost me no more than £15 in petrol to drive to london and back as my 2.8 litre costs me around £20 for the same trip.
All in i spent £40 on the trip using a hire car which was £3 cheaper than the train during off peak.
On top of that it allowed me the flexibility to come and go as i pleased and if i had wanted i could have visited another customer or done some shopping etc.
A season ticket to london from where i live opposite the train station is £6500 IIRC.
My car insurance is +-£450 a year.
Tax is £280
Maintenance variable but around £2000 a year including 6 tyres per year 2 sets rear one set front, brakes, servicing etc.
Fuel??? £2880 roughly
So i come out about £1000 better off roughly plus the convenience of a car obviously.
I’ve done it a few times and an extra hour on the train has helped to catch up with other work or replying to people’s pointless emails.
Sorry - missed this bit
Pre-deregulation, much of the bus industry was nationalised in all but name (see Tilling Groups https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Tilling ) and huge chunks of it were operated by local councils and city corporations. In the old days of trade union power these were just as regulated by the unions as the railways were, with all the usual restrictive practices, closed shops and all the rest.
Post-deregulation with private operators taking over, there was an immediate move to reduce wages, for the simple reason (as you have already picked up on) that anybody with a driving licence can be trained to drive a bus. There was therefore a much larger pool of potential labour that the employers could go to. Supply and demand again, but this time the reverse of the situation that the railways faced. There were more potential bus drivers than were needed to provide the service, so the rates of pay on offer took a dive.
Robertj21a said:
It's not a question of reducing the wages in one sector, rather not increasing them by such large percentages.
It was a case of reducing wages, y'know Pre-deregulation, much of the bus industry was nationalised in all but name (see Tilling Groups https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Tilling ) and huge chunks of it were operated by local councils and city corporations. In the old days of trade union power these were just as regulated by the unions as the railways were, with all the usual restrictive practices, closed shops and all the rest.
Post-deregulation with private operators taking over, there was an immediate move to reduce wages, for the simple reason (as you have already picked up on) that anybody with a driving licence can be trained to drive a bus. There was therefore a much larger pool of potential labour that the employers could go to. Supply and demand again, but this time the reverse of the situation that the railways faced. There were more potential bus drivers than were needed to provide the service, so the rates of pay on offer took a dive.
legzr1 said:
At 14:31 he posted earning quite a bit less than a train driver.
In less than 12 hours he's joined a union, negotiated a settlememt and significantly improved his salary.
Or he hasn't a clue wtf he's talking about.
Still hasn't let on what his job is either...
He sounds like a Manager.In less than 12 hours he's joined a union, negotiated a settlememt and significantly improved his salary.
Or he hasn't a clue wtf he's talking about.
Still hasn't let on what his job is either...
frankenstein12 said:
Actually within reason I have.
A case study in point.
A few weeks ago my car broke and I had to go visit a customer in London the next day.
I checked the train timetable and found i could get to my customer using the trains in around about the same time as I knew it normally takes me by car.
I then checked how much a ticket was which given I didnt need to be at my customers till 11am meant I could leave after 9am when the fares drop to off peak.
An off peak day return was iirc £43.
I then called a few car hire companies.
A local car hire company was able to supply me with a brand new ford fiesta for £27 for a days hire.
I decided it would probability cost me no more than £15 in petrol to drive to london and back as my 2.8 litre costs me around £20 for the same trip.
All in i spent £40 on the trip using a hire car which was £3 cheaper than the train during off peak.
On top of that it allowed me the flexibility to come and go as i pleased and if i had wanted i could have visited another customer or done some shopping etc.
A season ticket to london from where i live opposite the train station is £6500 IIRC.
My car insurance is +-£450 a year.
Tax is £280
Maintenance variable but around £2000 a year including 6 tyres per year 2 sets rear one set front, brakes, servicing etc.
Fuel??? £2880 roughly
So i come out about £1000 better off roughly plus the convenience of a car obviously.
No congestion charge, no parking fees?A case study in point.
A few weeks ago my car broke and I had to go visit a customer in London the next day.
I checked the train timetable and found i could get to my customer using the trains in around about the same time as I knew it normally takes me by car.
I then checked how much a ticket was which given I didnt need to be at my customers till 11am meant I could leave after 9am when the fares drop to off peak.
An off peak day return was iirc £43.
I then called a few car hire companies.
A local car hire company was able to supply me with a brand new ford fiesta for £27 for a days hire.
I decided it would probability cost me no more than £15 in petrol to drive to london and back as my 2.8 litre costs me around £20 for the same trip.
All in i spent £40 on the trip using a hire car which was £3 cheaper than the train during off peak.
On top of that it allowed me the flexibility to come and go as i pleased and if i had wanted i could have visited another customer or done some shopping etc.
A season ticket to london from where i live opposite the train station is £6500 IIRC.
My car insurance is +-£450 a year.
Tax is £280
Maintenance variable but around £2000 a year including 6 tyres per year 2 sets rear one set front, brakes, servicing etc.
Fuel??? £2880 roughly
So i come out about £1000 better off roughly plus the convenience of a car obviously.
gooner1 said:
frankenstein12 said:
Actually within reason I have.
A case study in point.
A few weeks ago my car broke and I had to go visit a customer in London the next day.
I checked the train timetable and found i could get to my customer using the trains in around about the same time as I knew it normally takes me by car.
I then checked how much a ticket was which given I didnt need to be at my customers till 11am meant I could leave after 9am when the fares drop to off peak.
An off peak day return was iirc £43.
I then called a few car hire companies.
A local car hire company was able to supply me with a brand new ford fiesta for £27 for a days hire.
I decided it would probability cost me no more than £15 in petrol to drive to london and back as my 2.8 litre costs me around £20 for the same trip.
All in i spent £40 on the trip using a hire car which was £3 cheaper than the train during off peak.
On top of that it allowed me the flexibility to come and go as i pleased and if i had wanted i could have visited another customer or done some shopping etc.
A season ticket to london from where i live opposite the train station is £6500 IIRC.
My car insurance is +-£450 a year.
Tax is £280
Maintenance variable but around £2000 a year including 6 tyres per year 2 sets rear one set front, brakes, servicing etc.
Fuel??? £2880 roughly
So i come out about £1000 better off roughly plus the convenience of a car obviously.
No congestion charge, no parking fees?A case study in point.
A few weeks ago my car broke and I had to go visit a customer in London the next day.
I checked the train timetable and found i could get to my customer using the trains in around about the same time as I knew it normally takes me by car.
I then checked how much a ticket was which given I didnt need to be at my customers till 11am meant I could leave after 9am when the fares drop to off peak.
An off peak day return was iirc £43.
I then called a few car hire companies.
A local car hire company was able to supply me with a brand new ford fiesta for £27 for a days hire.
I decided it would probability cost me no more than £15 in petrol to drive to london and back as my 2.8 litre costs me around £20 for the same trip.
All in i spent £40 on the trip using a hire car which was £3 cheaper than the train during off peak.
On top of that it allowed me the flexibility to come and go as i pleased and if i had wanted i could have visited another customer or done some shopping etc.
A season ticket to london from where i live opposite the train station is £6500 IIRC.
My car insurance is +-£450 a year.
Tax is £280
Maintenance variable but around £2000 a year including 6 tyres per year 2 sets rear one set front, brakes, servicing etc.
Fuel??? £2880 roughly
So i come out about £1000 better off roughly plus the convenience of a car obviously.
rs1952 said:
...Others can list the reasons if they have a mind to because at the moment I just simply can't be arsed...
...Perhaps - just perhaps - you haven't got a clue about what you're talking about...
...Some tend to forget that there are two sides in every argument, and those who automatically conclude that it is always the union’s fault when strikes happen has clearly not thought things through. Do they ever stop to question why management allowed the situation to develop in the first place? This is not uncommon when laymen start spouting about things they don’t fully understand...
All hail the wisdom of the uninformed
You sound pleasant....Perhaps - just perhaps - you haven't got a clue about what you're talking about...
...Some tend to forget that there are two sides in every argument, and those who automatically conclude that it is always the union’s fault when strikes happen has clearly not thought things through. Do they ever stop to question why management allowed the situation to develop in the first place? This is not uncommon when laymen start spouting about things they don’t fully understand...
All hail the wisdom of the uninformed
With regard to resolving issues with management - a normal human being would seek to resolve such issues through dialogue and wouldn't seek to target/punish the customer for a failure to reach agreement. If I had a beef with you I would take it out on you and not, say, your wife or another third party.
The media state that the actions of about 1,000 train staff affect the commute of about 300,000 Southern commuters. If that ratio is correct then I really don't know how those staff are able to look themselves in the mirror. I would be horrified with myself if my personal conduct negatively impacted even 1 person.
Hereward said:
rs1952 said:
...Others can list the reasons if they have a mind to because at the moment I just simply can't be arsed...
...Perhaps - just perhaps - you haven't got a clue about what you're talking about...
...Some tend to forget that there are two sides in every argument, and those who automatically conclude that it is always the union’s fault when strikes happen has clearly not thought things through. Do they ever stop to question why management allowed the situation to develop in the first place? This is not uncommon when laymen start spouting about things they don’t fully understand...
All hail the wisdom of the uninformed
You sound pleasant....Perhaps - just perhaps - you haven't got a clue about what you're talking about...
...Some tend to forget that there are two sides in every argument, and those who automatically conclude that it is always the union’s fault when strikes happen has clearly not thought things through. Do they ever stop to question why management allowed the situation to develop in the first place? This is not uncommon when laymen start spouting about things they don’t fully understand...
All hail the wisdom of the uninformed
With regard to resolving issues with management - a normal human being would seek to resolve such issues through dialogue and wouldn't seek to target/punish the customer for a failure to reach agreement. If I had a beef with you I would take it out on you and not, say, your wife or another third party.
The media state that the actions of about 1,000 train staff affect the commute of about 300,000 Southern commuters. If that ratio is correct then I really don't know how those staff are able to look themselves in the mirror. I would be horrified with myself if my personal conduct negatively impacted even 1 person.
But let's deal with quotation 3, which appears to be the one you are taking issue with.
Normal human beings do indeed start with dialogue when problems arise. Matters get escalated when that dialogue is one-sided or hits deaf ears. I have not been personally involved in the Southern rail dispute but I was deeply involved (on the management side, by the way) in a 3-week strike of the Workshop staff (fitters, electricians etc) at Bristol Bath Road depot in the1970s. It might be illuminating if you could let us know what your feelings about the matter would be:
The staff were paid what was called "availability bonus." Each depot in those days had its own allocation of locomotives, and it was obviously preferable that as many as possible were available for traffic at any one time and not stopped for repairs. The proportion of engines available for traffic was calculated weekly and the level of bonus was based on that. The average availability at the time was about 80%, varying usually between 75% and 90%.
BR management cascaded the class 50s from the LMR to the Western Region following electrification of the West Coast Main Line, and these locomotives were supposed to replace the remaining diesel-hydraulic locomotives that were still running at that time. The problem was, they were in an appalling condition when they arrived and this, coupled with the fact that the staff had not worked on this type of unit before, saw availability drop like a stone to around 50%. This of course caused a reduction in bonus payments.
The staff protested that the junk they had been sent to keep in traffic was affecting their earnings. The management took the view "you lot are employed to maintain these locomotives, so do your bloody jobs properly and you'll get your bonus." Talks did indeed go on, but neither side would effectively budge from their positions. As I said above, a strike was called that lasted 3 weeks.
Before you come to your judgement it might be best to remember two things. Firstly, the Workshop staff were not customer-facing - they were the background guys making sure that the nuts and bolts didn't fall off. Secondly, trains were already being cancelled before the strike because of the unreliability of the locomotive fleet.
If I get any responses I'll tell you what happened later
Hereward said:
You sound pleasant.
With regard to resolving issues with management - a normal human being would seek to resolve such issues through dialogue and wouldn't seek to target/punish the customer for a failure to reach agreement. If I had a beef with you I would take it out on you and not, say, your wife or another third party.
The media state that the actions of about 1,000 train staff affect the commute of about 300,000 Southern commuters. If that ratio is correct then I really don't know how those staff are able to look themselves in the mirror. I would be horrified with myself if my personal conduct negatively impacted even 1 person.
Tell me, who do you suppose controls. The media, and how many people do their views impact on? Have you ever taken part in talks with management or union members?With regard to resolving issues with management - a normal human being would seek to resolve such issues through dialogue and wouldn't seek to target/punish the customer for a failure to reach agreement. If I had a beef with you I would take it out on you and not, say, your wife or another third party.
The media state that the actions of about 1,000 train staff affect the commute of about 300,000 Southern commuters. If that ratio is correct then I really don't know how those staff are able to look themselves in the mirror. I would be horrified with myself if my personal conduct negatively impacted even 1 person.
Hereward said:
You sound pleasant.
Faced with some of the ignorance and stupidity in this thread, his replies are a lot more pleasant than most replies would be.Take some time and have a look at NPE for example and note the tone of the replies given by those that that know what they're talking about, coming from a position of knowledge and experience, to the fools who, deliberately or otherwise, just refuse to 'get it'.
Your sarcasm is noted but isn't really needed in this case.
Hereward said:
You sound pleasant.
With regard to resolving issues with management - a normal human being would seek to resolve such issues through dialogue and wouldn't seek to target/punish the customer for a failure to reach agreement. If I had a beef with you I would take it out on you and not, say, your wife or another third party.
The media state that the actions of about 1,000 train staff affect the commute of about 300,000 Southern commuters. If that ratio is correct then I really don't know how those staff are able to look themselves in the mirror. I would be horrified with myself if my personal conduct negatively impacted even 1 person.
I agree.With regard to resolving issues with management - a normal human being would seek to resolve such issues through dialogue and wouldn't seek to target/punish the customer for a failure to reach agreement. If I had a beef with you I would take it out on you and not, say, your wife or another third party.
The media state that the actions of about 1,000 train staff affect the commute of about 300,000 Southern commuters. If that ratio is correct then I really don't know how those staff are able to look themselves in the mirror. I would be horrified with myself if my personal conduct negatively impacted even 1 person.
However if you dare to propose a different view, you're branded as ignorant. Pointless arguing with a single agenda mindset.
The dispute is about protecting jobs and wages masquerading as a safety campaign. Hard working passengers are merely leverage for the union to achieve it's aims.
NDA said:
I agree.
However if you dare to propose a different view, you're branded as ignorant. Pointless arguing with a single agenda mindset.
The dispute is about protecting jobs and wages masquerading as a safety campaign. Hard working passengers are merely leverage for the union to achieve it's aims.
And the Rail companies have no Dog in this fight, there only concern being the welfareHowever if you dare to propose a different view, you're branded as ignorant. Pointless arguing with a single agenda mindset.
The dispute is about protecting jobs and wages masquerading as a safety campaign. Hard working passengers are merely leverage for the union to achieve it's aims.
and comfort of the paying customer, right?
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff