How to fix the Southern Rail dispute?
Discussion
According to Private Eye, the best way to answer the OP's question is to stop the Department of Transport engineering disputes in the first place.
"The 28.5 percent pay offer for Southern drivers may have helped end their 18-month dispute over driver-only-operated (DOO) trains, but presumably it isn’t the outcome the Department for Transport (DafT) intended when it engineered the dispute. At a public meeting in Croydon in February 2016, senior DafT rail official Peter Wilkinson ranted about train drivers’ high salaries and predicted industrial action. ‘We have got to break them,’ he said. ‘They have all borrowed money to buy cars and got credit cards.’.…”
"The 28.5 percent pay offer for Southern drivers may have helped end their 18-month dispute over driver-only-operated (DOO) trains, but presumably it isn’t the outcome the Department for Transport (DafT) intended when it engineered the dispute. At a public meeting in Croydon in February 2016, senior DafT rail official Peter Wilkinson ranted about train drivers’ high salaries and predicted industrial action. ‘We have got to break them,’ he said. ‘They have all borrowed money to buy cars and got credit cards.’.…”
DMN said:
According to Private Eye, the best way to answer the OP's question is to stop the Department of Transport engineering disputes in the first place.
"The 28.5 percent pay offer for Southern drivers may have helped end their 18-month dispute over driver-only-operated (DOO) trains, but presumably it isn’t the outcome the Department for Transport (DafT) intended when it engineered the dispute. At a public meeting in Croydon in February 2016, senior DafT rail official Peter Wilkinson ranted about train drivers’ high salaries and predicted industrial action. ‘We have got to break them,’ he said. ‘They have all borrowed money to buy cars and got credit cards.’.…”
These 'tactics' have been mentioned several times,in this very thread, most recently only days ago."The 28.5 percent pay offer for Southern drivers may have helped end their 18-month dispute over driver-only-operated (DOO) trains, but presumably it isn’t the outcome the Department for Transport (DafT) intended when it engineered the dispute. At a public meeting in Croydon in February 2016, senior DafT rail official Peter Wilkinson ranted about train drivers’ high salaries and predicted industrial action. ‘We have got to break them,’ he said. ‘They have all borrowed money to buy cars and got credit cards.’.…”
Those on the frontline knew exactly what was going on - others, particularly vocal, chose to ignore it.
Wilkinson was challenged on his 'facts', realised he was far, far out of his depth and disappeared - worry not, he'll rear his ignorant head again all too soon.
gottans said:
The government should state they won't prosecute any rail passengers who get into it any of the strikers. Can't see it happening but the country is effectively being held to ransom by a small group for I believe selfish motives.
There are I am sure plenty of people who would be willing step in a take these peoples jobs.
I didn't bother replying to this when it came in because it didn't appear to make much sense. However, if it was supposed to mean that the passengers should get immunity from prosecution if they take a pop at staff, it does perhaps suggest that the poster doesn't properly understand how a civilised society works.There are I am sure plenty of people who would be willing step in a take these peoples jobs.
And that of course leaves to one side the wisdom of clouting people who aren't actually on strike during strike days. That might be seen as, shall we say, counter-productive...
As regards the other points (selfish strikers, others being prepared to do the job for less money etc), we have had 40 pages of this thread so far where all these points have already been discussed, and after being put forward a little more eloquently than was managed here.
I am an anti-union right wing business cost analysis, chartered accountant, who help management make decisions. I am not a commuter and not on the SR region, nor am I involved in the railway industry but I do work for an engineering company. I do feel for the passengers. However this whole saga has intrigued me that management can get it so wrong that I have spent the last few nights, bed-time reading this whole thread from page 1.
Firstly, I would like to thank those drivers and ex-drivers who have given their time, efforts and frustrations with putting up with ignorant people like me throughout the journey of this thread. Your opinions, views and information download has been enlightening. Although, challenging at times, your overall patience on this thread show you to be real ambassadors for drivers.
Why my intrigue in the first place because I am sick and tired of biased media coverage (not just of this issue but just the way news reporting is full of half truths) that if you really want to know what is going on, you have to dig further and not rely on reported news. Secondly, as someone else has previously pointed out, the contract for the passenger buying a ticket is with the company, not the drivers.
Thirdly, I wanted to understand what this dispute is really about and why it has taken so long to resolve.
What have I learnt:
- unions have a stigma of top paid leaders forcing its members to vote in a certain way which earns them big bonuses. The truth is that these days are long gone, members direct the unions with issues and the voting is by secret ballot. Also a large part of their work is like acting as an internal safety regulator to ensure safe conditions for staff and customers i.e. having to keep corporate on the straight and narrow. It would seem that in our economy, we will always need unions where the business is a monopoly in the same way you will need government intervention.
- my ignorance led me to believe that train driving was a simple mundane task, I now understand it is more than long hours and anti-social hours but also a long training programme to get the required skills to qualify. In addition, experience and knowledge on routes gives intangible benefits due to so many variables in every day occurrences e.g. signal problems, unscheduled changes, deteriorating safety conditions from underinvestment, reduced safety regulations to simplify the business model for efficiency and cost savings. So as things deteriorate, behind the scenes, the day is saved by the staff (not just drivers) plugging the gaps with experience and knowledge. This is all done behind the scenes which is seamless to the passenger (except of course when we see train delays or cancellations). As this continues, the behind-the-scene responsibilities get bigger and bigger until there comes a point when employees say "enough is enough"
- as I suspected, SR management have issues (whether it is ASLEF, Govt or directors of SR). There is lack of respect in its workforce. A good business model only works when management treat each worker as a team member. Everyone is respected, everyone has a job to do in making the whole business run smoothly and everyone is listened to. Each person's job in the whole business is equally important - we are all cogs in the wheel to make it go round. Some cogs are paid more for different roles and experience but we all have a part to play. If management worked closely with its employees then you would not need unions. In the 21st century this is a normal business model, in the 1970's unions were required to protect staff from "them and us" behaviour.
- a train driver is paid a competitive market rate by that I mean they are neither underpaid nor overpaid, they are paid the correct going rate based on supply and demand. SR could not afford to sack all its drivers because there is a shortage of drivers and not enough trained up drivers. Drivers could find a job elsewhere but you have the obvious costs of relocation and pension ties.
One thing I have not quite understood, what is the government involvement in this? Surely they should just give SR a good reprimand and tell them that they are going to land a fine equivalent to a year's earnings. If there are clear safety issues and they are not being addressed then SR are not doing their job.
SR is a privately owned company. 100% owned by GTR, which is 100% owned by Govia, which is 65% owned by Go-Ahead (a FTSE250 company with global reaches) and 35% Keolis (a French transport company). There is no government ownership.
Firstly, I would like to thank those drivers and ex-drivers who have given their time, efforts and frustrations with putting up with ignorant people like me throughout the journey of this thread. Your opinions, views and information download has been enlightening. Although, challenging at times, your overall patience on this thread show you to be real ambassadors for drivers.
Why my intrigue in the first place because I am sick and tired of biased media coverage (not just of this issue but just the way news reporting is full of half truths) that if you really want to know what is going on, you have to dig further and not rely on reported news. Secondly, as someone else has previously pointed out, the contract for the passenger buying a ticket is with the company, not the drivers.
Thirdly, I wanted to understand what this dispute is really about and why it has taken so long to resolve.
What have I learnt:
- unions have a stigma of top paid leaders forcing its members to vote in a certain way which earns them big bonuses. The truth is that these days are long gone, members direct the unions with issues and the voting is by secret ballot. Also a large part of their work is like acting as an internal safety regulator to ensure safe conditions for staff and customers i.e. having to keep corporate on the straight and narrow. It would seem that in our economy, we will always need unions where the business is a monopoly in the same way you will need government intervention.
- my ignorance led me to believe that train driving was a simple mundane task, I now understand it is more than long hours and anti-social hours but also a long training programme to get the required skills to qualify. In addition, experience and knowledge on routes gives intangible benefits due to so many variables in every day occurrences e.g. signal problems, unscheduled changes, deteriorating safety conditions from underinvestment, reduced safety regulations to simplify the business model for efficiency and cost savings. So as things deteriorate, behind the scenes, the day is saved by the staff (not just drivers) plugging the gaps with experience and knowledge. This is all done behind the scenes which is seamless to the passenger (except of course when we see train delays or cancellations). As this continues, the behind-the-scene responsibilities get bigger and bigger until there comes a point when employees say "enough is enough"
- as I suspected, SR management have issues (whether it is ASLEF, Govt or directors of SR). There is lack of respect in its workforce. A good business model only works when management treat each worker as a team member. Everyone is respected, everyone has a job to do in making the whole business run smoothly and everyone is listened to. Each person's job in the whole business is equally important - we are all cogs in the wheel to make it go round. Some cogs are paid more for different roles and experience but we all have a part to play. If management worked closely with its employees then you would not need unions. In the 21st century this is a normal business model, in the 1970's unions were required to protect staff from "them and us" behaviour.
- a train driver is paid a competitive market rate by that I mean they are neither underpaid nor overpaid, they are paid the correct going rate based on supply and demand. SR could not afford to sack all its drivers because there is a shortage of drivers and not enough trained up drivers. Drivers could find a job elsewhere but you have the obvious costs of relocation and pension ties.
One thing I have not quite understood, what is the government involvement in this? Surely they should just give SR a good reprimand and tell them that they are going to land a fine equivalent to a year's earnings. If there are clear safety issues and they are not being addressed then SR are not doing their job.
SR is a privately owned company. 100% owned by GTR, which is 100% owned by Govia, which is 65% owned by Go-Ahead (a FTSE250 company with global reaches) and 35% Keolis (a French transport company). There is no government ownership.
leef44 said:
I am an anti-union right wing business cost analysis, chartered accountant, who help management make decisions. I am not a commuter and not on the SR region, nor am I involved in the railway industry but I do work for an engineering company. I do feel for the passengers. However this whole saga has intrigued me that management can get it so wrong that I have spent the last few nights, bed-time reading this whole thread from page 1.
Firstly, I would like to thank those drivers and ex-drivers who have given their time, efforts and frustrations with putting up with ignorant people like me throughout the journey of this thread. Your opinions, views and information download has been enlightening. Although, challenging at times, your overall patience on this thread show you to be real ambassadors for drivers.
Why my intrigue in the first place because I am sick and tired of biased media coverage (not just of this issue but just the way news reporting is full of half truths) that if you really want to know what is going on, you have to dig further and not rely on reported news. Secondly, as someone else has previously pointed out, the contract for the passenger buying a ticket is with the company, not the drivers.
Thirdly, I wanted to understand what this dispute is really about and why it has taken so long to resolve.
What have I learnt:
- unions have a stigma of top paid leaders forcing its members to vote in a certain way which earns them big bonuses. The truth is that these days are long gone, members direct the unions with issues and the voting is by secret ballot. Also a large part of their work is like acting as an internal safety regulator to ensure safe conditions for staff and customers i.e. having to keep corporate on the straight and narrow. It would seem that in our economy, we will always need unions where the business is a monopoly in the same way you will need government intervention.
- my ignorance led me to believe that train driving was a simple mundane task, I now understand it is more than long hours and anti-social hours but also a long training programme to get the required skills to qualify. In addition, experience and knowledge on routes gives intangible benefits due to so many variables in every day occurrences e.g. signal problems, unscheduled changes, deteriorating safety conditions from underinvestment, reduced safety regulations to simplify the business model for efficiency and cost savings. So as things deteriorate, behind the scenes, the day is saved by the staff (not just drivers) plugging the gaps with experience and knowledge. This is all done behind the scenes which is seamless to the passenger (except of course when we see train delays or cancellations). As this continues, the behind-the-scene responsibilities get bigger and bigger until there comes a point when employees say "enough is enough"
- as I suspected, SR management have issues (whether it is ASLEF, Govt or directors of SR). There is lack of respect in its workforce. A good business model only works when management treat each worker as a team member. Everyone is respected, everyone has a job to do in making the whole business run smoothly and everyone is listened to. Each person's job in the whole business is equally important - we are all cogs in the wheel to make it go round. Some cogs are paid more for different roles and experience but we all have a part to play. If management worked closely with its employees then you would not need unions. In the 21st century this is a normal business model, in the 1970's unions were required to protect staff from "them and us" behaviour.
- a train driver is paid a competitive market rate by that I mean they are neither underpaid nor overpaid, they are paid the correct going rate based on supply and demand. SR could not afford to sack all its drivers because there is a shortage of drivers and not enough trained up drivers. Drivers could find a job elsewhere but you have the obvious costs of relocation and pension ties.
One thing I have not quite understood, what is the government involvement in this? Surely they should just give SR a good reprimand and tell them that they are going to land a fine equivalent to a year's earnings. If there are clear safety issues and they are not being addressed then SR are not doing their job.
SR is a privately owned company. 100% owned by GTR, which is 100% owned by Govia, which is 65% owned by Go-Ahead (a FTSE250 company with global reaches) and 35% Keolis (a French transport company). There is no government ownership.
Good post.Firstly, I would like to thank those drivers and ex-drivers who have given their time, efforts and frustrations with putting up with ignorant people like me throughout the journey of this thread. Your opinions, views and information download has been enlightening. Although, challenging at times, your overall patience on this thread show you to be real ambassadors for drivers.
Why my intrigue in the first place because I am sick and tired of biased media coverage (not just of this issue but just the way news reporting is full of half truths) that if you really want to know what is going on, you have to dig further and not rely on reported news. Secondly, as someone else has previously pointed out, the contract for the passenger buying a ticket is with the company, not the drivers.
Thirdly, I wanted to understand what this dispute is really about and why it has taken so long to resolve.
What have I learnt:
- unions have a stigma of top paid leaders forcing its members to vote in a certain way which earns them big bonuses. The truth is that these days are long gone, members direct the unions with issues and the voting is by secret ballot. Also a large part of their work is like acting as an internal safety regulator to ensure safe conditions for staff and customers i.e. having to keep corporate on the straight and narrow. It would seem that in our economy, we will always need unions where the business is a monopoly in the same way you will need government intervention.
- my ignorance led me to believe that train driving was a simple mundane task, I now understand it is more than long hours and anti-social hours but also a long training programme to get the required skills to qualify. In addition, experience and knowledge on routes gives intangible benefits due to so many variables in every day occurrences e.g. signal problems, unscheduled changes, deteriorating safety conditions from underinvestment, reduced safety regulations to simplify the business model for efficiency and cost savings. So as things deteriorate, behind the scenes, the day is saved by the staff (not just drivers) plugging the gaps with experience and knowledge. This is all done behind the scenes which is seamless to the passenger (except of course when we see train delays or cancellations). As this continues, the behind-the-scene responsibilities get bigger and bigger until there comes a point when employees say "enough is enough"
- as I suspected, SR management have issues (whether it is ASLEF, Govt or directors of SR). There is lack of respect in its workforce. A good business model only works when management treat each worker as a team member. Everyone is respected, everyone has a job to do in making the whole business run smoothly and everyone is listened to. Each person's job in the whole business is equally important - we are all cogs in the wheel to make it go round. Some cogs are paid more for different roles and experience but we all have a part to play. If management worked closely with its employees then you would not need unions. In the 21st century this is a normal business model, in the 1970's unions were required to protect staff from "them and us" behaviour.
- a train driver is paid a competitive market rate by that I mean they are neither underpaid nor overpaid, they are paid the correct going rate based on supply and demand. SR could not afford to sack all its drivers because there is a shortage of drivers and not enough trained up drivers. Drivers could find a job elsewhere but you have the obvious costs of relocation and pension ties.
One thing I have not quite understood, what is the government involvement in this? Surely they should just give SR a good reprimand and tell them that they are going to land a fine equivalent to a year's earnings. If there are clear safety issues and they are not being addressed then SR are not doing their job.
SR is a privately owned company. 100% owned by GTR, which is 100% owned by Govia, which is 65% owned by Go-Ahead (a FTSE250 company with global reaches) and 35% Keolis (a French transport company). There is no government ownership.
SR may be a privately run company but passenger services are run as a franchise (there are exceptions like the Open Access operators but not relevant here) - government ( via DfT) dictate the nature of the franchise and make stipulations on everything from type of stock (units and carriages) to staffing.
At times, their involvement is necessary (think East Coast and franchise holders going bust). At others, their involvement is purely political, divisive and wholly unnecessary - this thread shows what can happen.
leef44 said:
One thing I have not quite understood, what is the government involvement in this? Surely they should just give SR a good reprimand and tell them that they are going to land a fine equivalent to a year's earnings. If there are clear safety issues and they are not being addressed then SR are not doing their job.
An extract from a good post and well done on doing your research. I am a commuter on Southern and have done my research in to the matter and this is why I broadly support the unions and the desire for two members of staff with safety training onboard. It gets more complicated deciding what training they need though. Having said that I think the tactics of the RMT could have been better, and their PR could be a lot better.The government involvement comes from the franchise agreement itself. The Southern franchise agreement is slightly different to the others in that it is a management agreement. This is because it was realised at the time that the works at London Bridge, the merging of the three previous franchises etc were going to cause issues and no private company would want to take on the risk. So on the GTR franchise that includes Gatwick Express, Southern, Thameslink, and Great Northern the government take all the revenue risk. Southern are basically paid a fee to manage the service. It is widely believed (possibly known) that the agreement includes an obligation for the introduction of driver only trains.
It is suspected by the unions and in particular the RMT that the other franchise agreements let since the GTR one include a driver only obligation as well. That is why there are now strikes on routes other than Southerns. The RMT being more directly affected as they represent most of the guards/conductors.
The force behind the move to Driver Only appears to be the McNulty (spelling!) Report which said they should do it and what it would save. Rather unfortunately it would appear that the estimates of the strike disruption were wrong. I think it suggested a week or 10 days of disruption rather than the year on Southern. I think you will find that the loss of ticket revenue alone on Southern over the last 2 years has more than offset the total lifetime savings of going only. I seem to recall it has been suggested the loss of ticket revenue on Southern has been over £60million pa over the 2 financial years the dispute has spanned. That figures excludes the consequential costs to the economy.
leef44 said:
I would like to thank those drivers and ex-drivers who have given their time, effort throughout the journey of this thread.
You're welcome.leef44 said:
led me to believe that train driving was a simple mundane task
If you've got the time/interest (or can't sleep), try this -https://www.rssb.co.uk/rgs/rulebooks/GERM8000-trai...
That's one of the books we need to know.
Thanks for that. So SR is on a fixed management fee so there is no incentive for them to improve or invest in improvement.
I see now why some people on this thread are talking about the govt should just admit that they made a mistake, own up and do a U-turn.
I guess the end goal for the govt is streamlining and evolving the rail business model by switching to DOO in the longer term with natural erosion of staff. As long as this is not at the cost of another 1998 Clapham junction disaster. So the govt's number one priority has to be safety above all else. And it only takes a PR exercise to emphasise this and emphasise what they have done for safety to keep the voting public happy. This would then mean they could justify the U-turn.
I will now go back into my shell and continue dreaming in my fantasy world.
I see now why some people on this thread are talking about the govt should just admit that they made a mistake, own up and do a U-turn.
I guess the end goal for the govt is streamlining and evolving the rail business model by switching to DOO in the longer term with natural erosion of staff. As long as this is not at the cost of another 1998 Clapham junction disaster. So the govt's number one priority has to be safety above all else. And it only takes a PR exercise to emphasise this and emphasise what they have done for safety to keep the voting public happy. This would then mean they could justify the U-turn.
I will now go back into my shell and continue dreaming in my fantasy world.
leef44 said:
a lot of sense
At last, someone who not only listens but goes the extra mile to look behind the headlines. You're a credit to yourself and this forum, sir.You certainly raise some valid points and your perception does you great service. In our benighted corner of the railway there is a definite "them and us" feeling that becomes more entrenched with each new battle. I don't drive for Southern (and it'd take a lot to get me to, money certainly wouldn't be enough) but I share track with them and sitting in their messrooms, chatting to the front line staff and absorbing what's been going on the past years has definitely been food for thought. They, like us, have a hard-earned loathing of management (and union in a lot of cases) and we all work on a local level.... some of our managers who actually take the time to treat us like the valuable assets we actually are (or even human beings) are the ones for whom we work. We put in the extra effort for the customer (passengers in old language) and for out depot management, do it because we're by and large self-motivated, highly trained and professional people. We most certainly don't do it for the money. Many drivers on Southern are of the old school where, as previously pointed out, they had to work 12 out of 13 days and pounce on every enhancement available to get a decent wage. They'll take the money offered now, but that's not why they were there in the first place. And we emphatically DO NOT do it because Charles Horton and the rarefied echelons of management treat us with utter comtempt
If our line manager asks us for an explanation as to how we lost three minutes on a trip two weeks ago ...that has landed a charge for seventy or a hundred delay minutes on the depot... we provide answers even if it means spending our own time reading back diagrams and writing reports, and we do that because our line manager will help us out quid pro quo if we need it, not because Head Office will be sending stern emails round threatening dire consequences if we don't. Union are often seen as simply another level of management, who if anything treat us with greater contempt because they are supposed to represent our needs and conspicuously fail so to do. Many drivers pay the (ridiculously expensive) union dues simply because if they have a safety-of-the-line incident they'll need representation and access to legal cover because the reality ranges from reprimands, last warnings, loss of job. Or prison, of course
Interestingly, driving in the Sussex-London area is currently about the hardest anywhere on the railway. New routes, new traction, new Rules (all the time), intensity of diagramming, horrendous shift patterns, incredible complexity of signalling and layout and massive changes to how that is operated... A driver came to us not long ago; a 25-year man, driven the ultimate (Virgin), driven in the old days of Southern. He could not believe how anyone could pass out on our patch and not expect serious safety of the line incidents very soon after becoming productive on their own. In fact, the statistics prove him right... it's worthy of comment if a Newly Qualified Driver makes it months before their first screw-up, let alone years. We buck the odds every time we drive a train
I finished nights a week and a half ago. Tomorrow morning I'll be at work at 03:35. At work, that means my alarm is set for 02:15. We regularly get jobs which are four hours of driving, an hour's break and four more hours of driving (we get jobs with nearly five hours straight driving) Give that a moment's thought... get in your car, drive from Portsmouth to Manchester. Have, at best an hour's break (though you're only entitled to half an hour). Then get back in and drive back. Without making a single mistake, keeping to a timeframe of within one minute at each significant point along the way and at no point deviating over the posted speed limit by more than three mph. In addition, you have to know in advance every posted speed limit and be able to quote verbatim any law chosen at random from the Highway Code if asked. And all that after five hours sleep and a 3 a.m. start. Not to mention that toilet needs are largely your problem, don't be expecting to just be able to pull over if you need a pee or want to get a coffee or whatever. Oh, and you need to be able to fix, repair or bypass any piece of equipment that might fail on your vehicle. Ah, yeah, and know and utilise authenticated radio procedure. And if a deer, pheasant, pigeon... person... jumps in front of you the best you can hope for is that you won't come off the road because you aren't swerving around them. Better hope the windscreen wiper works
There's a lot to driving a train and anyone who thinks it's easy, or overpaid, really ought to have a try. You can even ask for a cab ride, most services will accommodate if you write a good enough begging letter. Something like one third of trainees never make the driving grade, by the way. Something like 80% never even get through the interview procedure
We don't ask for sympathy and we don't need to justify our pay grade. All we ask is that people who know nothing of what they're speaking about extend the courtesy to acknowledge it's a highly specialised and extremely difficult job and basically get the f
k off our backs. You don't like the service you're getting? Your MP is probably the place to start, because they're the start of a long chain that leads through government to the almost unregulated and global conglomerates that are getting fat on vampiric amounts of profit. Drivers are not the enemy, they're generally the reason the service runs even half as well as it doesEDIT for spelinlg an grammer
Edited by Nik da Greek on Sunday 19th November 18:09
Nik da Greek said:
At last, someone who not only listens but goes the extra mile to look behind the headlines. You're a credit to yourself and this forum, sir.
You certainly raise some valid points and your perception does you great service. In our benighted corner of the railway there is a definite "them and us" feeling that becomes more entrenched with each new battle. I don't drive for Southern (and it'd take a lot to get me to, money certainly wouldn't be enough) but I share track with them and sitting in their messrooms, chatting to the front line staff and absorbing what's been going on the past years has definitely been food for thought. They, like us, have a hard-earned loathing of management (and union in a lot of cases) and we all work on a local level.... some of our managers who actually take the time to treat us like the valuable assets we actually are (or even human beings) are the ones for whom we work. We put in the extra effort for the customer (passengers in old language) and for out depot management, do it because we're by and large self-motivated, highly trained and professional people. We most certainly don't do it for the money. Many drivers on Southern are of the old school where, as previously pointed out, they had to work 12 out of 13 days and pounce on every enhancement available to get a decent wage. They'll take the money offered now, but that's not why they were there in the first place. And we emphatically DO NOT do it because Charles Horton and the rarefied echelons of management treat us with utter comtempt
If our line manager asks us for an explanation as to how we lost three minutes on a trip two weeks ago ...that has landed a charge for seventy or a hundred delay minutes on the depot... we provide answers even if it means spending our own time reading back diagrams and writing reports, and we do that because our line manager will help us out quid pro quo if we need it, not because Head Office will be sending stern emails round threatening dire consequences if we don't. Union are often seen as simply another level of management, who if anything treat us with greater contempt because they are supposed to represent our needs and conspicuously fail so to do. Many drivers pay the (ridiculously expensive) union dues simply because if they have a safety-of-the-line incident they'll need representation and access to legal cover because the reality ranges from reprimands, last warnings, loss of job. Or prison, of course
Interestingly, driving in the Sussex-London area is currently about the hardest anywhere on the railway. New routes, new traction, new Rules (all the time), intensity of diagramming, horrendous shift patterns, incredible complexity of signalling and layout and massive changes to how that is operated... A driver came to us not long ago; a 25-year man, driven the ultimate (Virgin), driven in the old days of Southern. He could not believe how anyone could pass out on our patch and not expect serious safety of the line incidents very soon after becoming productive on their own. In fact, the statistics prove him right... it's worthy of comment if a Newly Qualified Driver makes it months before their first screw-up, let alone years. We buck the odds every time we drive a train
I finished nights a week and a half ago. Tomorrow morning I'll be at work at 03:35. At work, that means my alarm is set for 02:15. We regularly get jobs which are four hours of driving, an hour's break and four more hours of driving (we get jobs with nearly five hours straight driving) Give that a moment's thought... get in your car, drive from Portsmouth to Manchester. Have, at best an hour's break (though you're only entitled to half an hour). Then get back in and drive back. Without making a single mistake, keeping to a timeframe of within one minute at each significant point along the way and at no point deviating over the posted speed limit by more than three mph. In addition, you have to know in advance every posted speed limit and be able to quote verbatim any law chosen at random from the Highway Code if asked. And all that after five hours sleep and a 3 a.m. start. Not to mention that toilet needs are largely your problem, don't be expecting to just be able to pull over if you need a pee or want to get a coffee or whatever. Oh, and you need to be able to fix, repair or bypass any piece of equipment that might fail on your vehicle. Ah, yeah, and know and utilise authenticated radio procedure. And if a deer, pheasant, pigeon... person... jumps in front of you the best you can hope for is that you won't come off the road because you aren't swerving around them. Better hope the windscreen wiper works
There's a lot to driving a train and anyone who thinks it's easy, or overpaid, really ought to have a try. You can even ask for a cab ride, most services will accommodate if you write a good enough begging letter. Something like one third of trainees never make the driving grade, by the way. Something like 80% never even get through the interview procedure
We don't ask for sympathy and we don't need to justify our pay grade. All we ask is that people who know nothing of what they're speaking about extend the courtesy to acknowledge it's a highly specialised and extremely difficult job and basically get the fk off our backs. You don't like the service you're getting? Your MP is probably the place to start, because they're the start of a long chain that leads through government to the almost unregulated and global conglomerates that are getting fat on vampiric amounts of profit. Drivers are not the enemy, they're generally the reason the service runs even half as well as it does
EDIT for spelinlg an grammer
Thank you for that. I was frustratingly trying to find a similar post you made many pages ago when newcomers to this thread (SR passengers) were airing their frustrations, targeted at the drivers.You certainly raise some valid points and your perception does you great service. In our benighted corner of the railway there is a definite "them and us" feeling that becomes more entrenched with each new battle. I don't drive for Southern (and it'd take a lot to get me to, money certainly wouldn't be enough) but I share track with them and sitting in their messrooms, chatting to the front line staff and absorbing what's been going on the past years has definitely been food for thought. They, like us, have a hard-earned loathing of management (and union in a lot of cases) and we all work on a local level.... some of our managers who actually take the time to treat us like the valuable assets we actually are (or even human beings) are the ones for whom we work. We put in the extra effort for the customer (passengers in old language) and for out depot management, do it because we're by and large self-motivated, highly trained and professional people. We most certainly don't do it for the money. Many drivers on Southern are of the old school where, as previously pointed out, they had to work 12 out of 13 days and pounce on every enhancement available to get a decent wage. They'll take the money offered now, but that's not why they were there in the first place. And we emphatically DO NOT do it because Charles Horton and the rarefied echelons of management treat us with utter comtempt
If our line manager asks us for an explanation as to how we lost three minutes on a trip two weeks ago ...that has landed a charge for seventy or a hundred delay minutes on the depot... we provide answers even if it means spending our own time reading back diagrams and writing reports, and we do that because our line manager will help us out quid pro quo if we need it, not because Head Office will be sending stern emails round threatening dire consequences if we don't. Union are often seen as simply another level of management, who if anything treat us with greater contempt because they are supposed to represent our needs and conspicuously fail so to do. Many drivers pay the (ridiculously expensive) union dues simply because if they have a safety-of-the-line incident they'll need representation and access to legal cover because the reality ranges from reprimands, last warnings, loss of job. Or prison, of course
Interestingly, driving in the Sussex-London area is currently about the hardest anywhere on the railway. New routes, new traction, new Rules (all the time), intensity of diagramming, horrendous shift patterns, incredible complexity of signalling and layout and massive changes to how that is operated... A driver came to us not long ago; a 25-year man, driven the ultimate (Virgin), driven in the old days of Southern. He could not believe how anyone could pass out on our patch and not expect serious safety of the line incidents very soon after becoming productive on their own. In fact, the statistics prove him right... it's worthy of comment if a Newly Qualified Driver makes it months before their first screw-up, let alone years. We buck the odds every time we drive a train
I finished nights a week and a half ago. Tomorrow morning I'll be at work at 03:35. At work, that means my alarm is set for 02:15. We regularly get jobs which are four hours of driving, an hour's break and four more hours of driving (we get jobs with nearly five hours straight driving) Give that a moment's thought... get in your car, drive from Portsmouth to Manchester. Have, at best an hour's break (though you're only entitled to half an hour). Then get back in and drive back. Without making a single mistake, keeping to a timeframe of within one minute at each significant point along the way and at no point deviating over the posted speed limit by more than three mph. In addition, you have to know in advance every posted speed limit and be able to quote verbatim any law chosen at random from the Highway Code if asked. And all that after five hours sleep and a 3 a.m. start. Not to mention that toilet needs are largely your problem, don't be expecting to just be able to pull over if you need a pee or want to get a coffee or whatever. Oh, and you need to be able to fix, repair or bypass any piece of equipment that might fail on your vehicle. Ah, yeah, and know and utilise authenticated radio procedure. And if a deer, pheasant, pigeon... person... jumps in front of you the best you can hope for is that you won't come off the road because you aren't swerving around them. Better hope the windscreen wiper works
There's a lot to driving a train and anyone who thinks it's easy, or overpaid, really ought to have a try. You can even ask for a cab ride, most services will accommodate if you write a good enough begging letter. Something like one third of trainees never make the driving grade, by the way. Something like 80% never even get through the interview procedure
We don't ask for sympathy and we don't need to justify our pay grade. All we ask is that people who know nothing of what they're speaking about extend the courtesy to acknowledge it's a highly specialised and extremely difficult job and basically get the f
k off our backs. You don't like the service you're getting? Your MP is probably the place to start, because they're the start of a long chain that leads through government to the almost unregulated and global conglomerates that are getting fat on vampiric amounts of profit. Drivers are not the enemy, they're generally the reason the service runs even half as well as it doesEDIT for spelinlg an grammer
Edited by Nik da Greek on Sunday 19th November 18:09
If this was a modern day company, you would have Chris Grayling going into the mess room, chatting with the drivers and listening to their rant. He would then go for a train ride with a driver (hopefully one with an instructor seat) and look at their average day. He would be followed by a posse of ASLEF senior managers and SR directors. This whole episode would no doubt be followed by a flock of paparrazi.
And then, in a modern day company, it's not a case of "there! PR exercise done!". Instead it would then be a case of "right! let's sit down and go thru the biggest issues and address them!"
He would then go to Theresa May and say "things need to change". Then he would walk to the next door office and say to Phillip Hammond "...about that budget plan, we need to amend it!"
...back to my dream world.
leef44 said:
Thanks for that. So SR is on a fixed management fee so there is no incentive for them to improve or invest in improvement.
I believe that there are performance guarantees within the contract, however Southern/GTR have claimed some of those should not apply due to force majeure from the strike etc.leef44 said:
.I guess the end goal for the govt is streamlining and evolving the rail business model by switching to DOO in the longer term with natural erosion of staff. As long as this is not at the cost of another 1998 Clapham junction disaster. So the govt's number one priority has to be safety above all else. And it only takes a PR exercise to emphasise this and emphasise what they have done for safety to keep the voting public happy. This would then mean they could justify the U-turn.
I will now go back into my shell and continue dreaming in my fantasy world.
The bit missing about a U Turn is that the government will tell you that the changes are safe because the RSSB and ORR say they are. The latter being a government body, the former being an industry one. The RSSB make great play of their independence, however their board make-up may give the impression they are not as independent as one might expect https://www.rssb.co.uk/about-rssb/governance/board...I will now go back into my shell and continue dreaming in my fantasy world.
In my business my professional body says that whether there is a conflict of interest should be determined by the public looking in, not us looking out. Not sure I need to say more.
Nik da Greek said:
By the way, I think the phrase you're looking for is "People like Horton (and Wilkinson) should <NOT> be let anywhere near an industry which performs the important task of getting many thousands of people to work every day." 
Touché! That'll teach me for failing to proof read properly. 
My excuse is a surfeit of Merlot.
1-1 draw. When do we schedule the replay?
rs1952 said:
Red Devil said:
I often wonder what might have happened if Gerry Fiennes had been in the main driving seat and given the freedom to make a difference.
Gerry Fiennes would still have had the problem of falling passenger numbers and cash receipts, for both passenger and freight services. There would still have been closures and rationalisations - whether they would have been the same ones that we actually had would be another matter.Add in a government wedded to road transport (with a crooked Minister of Transport at the helm!) and susequent long term under-investment in the railways and the picture is complete..
Unfortunately another in-built disadvantage is the lack of visionary thinking and long term strategic decision making endemic to HM Teasury.
rs1952 said:
But something that Gerry Fiennes had that present SR management clearly do not is an ability to understand their staff and not to upset them needlessly. He had no place for red rags, and left guards and signalmen to use them. I never met the man (joining the railway as I did 2 years after he'd been given the bullet for publishing his book) but my father did on one of Fiennes' "wandering about the system getting to know people" jaunts. A genuine sort of bloke, so the old man said.
That's not only due to his character and personality but just as much to his CV. He started at the bottom as an apprentice on the LNER and worked his ticket to the top.One of the reasons so many managers don't have a clue is that their learning is based on books//theory and early parachuting into the comfy seats.
They have far too little practical experience of what it is like at the coal face or getting on with those who toil at it.
Deep down though the real blame lies at the door of the bean counters. Staff are treated in the accounts as a cost. Never as an asset.
My interest in railways (I have never worked in the industry though) was through a family history of involvement from the mid 19th century.
The company was an equipment supplier not just to UK railways but throughout the globe where British customs and practice were predominant.
My father knew all the CMEs of the Big 4 but in particular was a close friend of HNG and OVB. He retired a couple of years before OVB did from CIE.
When OVB returned to England he was a guest at our house on several occasions before his emigration to Malta.
leef44 said:
I am an anti-union right wing business cost analysis, chartered accountant, who help management make decisions. I am not a commuter and not on the SR region, nor am I involved in the railway industry but I do work for an engineering company. I do feel for the passengers. However this whole saga has intrigued me that management can get it so wrong that I have spent the last few nights, bed-time reading this whole thread from page 1.
Firstly, I would like to thank those drivers and ex-drivers who have given their time, efforts and frustrations with putting up with ignorant people like me throughout the journey of this thread. Your opinions, views and information download has been enlightening. Although, challenging at times, your overall patience on this thread show you to be real ambassadors for drivers.
Why my intrigue in the first place because I am sick and tired of biased media coverage (not just of this issue but just the way news reporting is full of half truths) that if you really want to know what is going on, you have to dig further and not rely on reported news. Secondly, as someone else has previously pointed out, the contract for the passenger buying a ticket is with the company, not the drivers.
Thirdly, I wanted to understand what this dispute is really about and why it has taken so long to resolve.
What have I learnt:
- unions have a stigma of top paid leaders forcing its members to vote in a certain way which earns them big bonuses. The truth is that these days are long gone, members direct the unions with issues and the voting is by secret ballot. Also a large part of their work is like acting as an internal safety regulator to ensure safe conditions for staff and customers i.e. having to keep corporate on the straight and narrow. It would seem that in our economy, we will always need unions where the business is a monopoly in the same way you will need government intervention.
- my ignorance led me to believe that train driving was a simple mundane task, I now understand it is more than long hours and anti-social hours but also a long training programme to get the required skills to qualify. In addition, experience and knowledge on routes gives intangible benefits due to so many variables in every day occurrences e.g. signal problems, unscheduled changes, deteriorating safety conditions from underinvestment, reduced safety regulations to simplify the business model for efficiency and cost savings. So as things deteriorate, behind the scenes, the day is saved by the staff (not just drivers) plugging the gaps with experience and knowledge. This is all done behind the scenes which is seamless to the passenger (except of course when we see train delays or cancellations). As this continues, the behind-the-scene responsibilities get bigger and bigger until there comes a point when employees say "enough is enough"
- as I suspected, SR management have issues (whether it is ASLEF, Govt or directors of SR). There is lack of respect in its workforce. A good business model only works when management treat each worker as a team member. Everyone is respected, everyone has a job to do in making the whole business run smoothly and everyone is listened to. Each person's job in the whole business is equally important - we are all cogs in the wheel to make it go round. Some cogs are paid more for different roles and experience but we all have a part to play. If management worked closely with its employees then you would not need unions. In the 21st century this is a normal business model, in the 1970's unions were required to protect staff from "them and us" behaviour.
- a train driver is paid a competitive market rate by that I mean they are neither underpaid nor overpaid, they are paid the correct going rate based on supply and demand. SR could not afford to sack all its drivers because there is a shortage of drivers and not enough trained up drivers. Drivers could find a job elsewhere but you have the obvious costs of relocation and pension ties.
One thing I have not quite understood, what is the government involvement in this? Surely they should just give SR a good reprimand and tell them that they are going to land a fine equivalent to a year's earnings. If there are clear safety issues and they are not being addressed then SR are not doing their job.
SR is a privately owned company. 100% owned by GTR, which is 100% owned by Govia, which is 65% owned by Go-Ahead (a FTSE250 company with global reaches) and 35% Keolis (a French transport company). There is no government ownership.
A sensible post? GET OUT! Firstly, I would like to thank those drivers and ex-drivers who have given their time, efforts and frustrations with putting up with ignorant people like me throughout the journey of this thread. Your opinions, views and information download has been enlightening. Although, challenging at times, your overall patience on this thread show you to be real ambassadors for drivers.
Why my intrigue in the first place because I am sick and tired of biased media coverage (not just of this issue but just the way news reporting is full of half truths) that if you really want to know what is going on, you have to dig further and not rely on reported news. Secondly, as someone else has previously pointed out, the contract for the passenger buying a ticket is with the company, not the drivers.
Thirdly, I wanted to understand what this dispute is really about and why it has taken so long to resolve.
What have I learnt:
- unions have a stigma of top paid leaders forcing its members to vote in a certain way which earns them big bonuses. The truth is that these days are long gone, members direct the unions with issues and the voting is by secret ballot. Also a large part of their work is like acting as an internal safety regulator to ensure safe conditions for staff and customers i.e. having to keep corporate on the straight and narrow. It would seem that in our economy, we will always need unions where the business is a monopoly in the same way you will need government intervention.
- my ignorance led me to believe that train driving was a simple mundane task, I now understand it is more than long hours and anti-social hours but also a long training programme to get the required skills to qualify. In addition, experience and knowledge on routes gives intangible benefits due to so many variables in every day occurrences e.g. signal problems, unscheduled changes, deteriorating safety conditions from underinvestment, reduced safety regulations to simplify the business model for efficiency and cost savings. So as things deteriorate, behind the scenes, the day is saved by the staff (not just drivers) plugging the gaps with experience and knowledge. This is all done behind the scenes which is seamless to the passenger (except of course when we see train delays or cancellations). As this continues, the behind-the-scene responsibilities get bigger and bigger until there comes a point when employees say "enough is enough"
- as I suspected, SR management have issues (whether it is ASLEF, Govt or directors of SR). There is lack of respect in its workforce. A good business model only works when management treat each worker as a team member. Everyone is respected, everyone has a job to do in making the whole business run smoothly and everyone is listened to. Each person's job in the whole business is equally important - we are all cogs in the wheel to make it go round. Some cogs are paid more for different roles and experience but we all have a part to play. If management worked closely with its employees then you would not need unions. In the 21st century this is a normal business model, in the 1970's unions were required to protect staff from "them and us" behaviour.
- a train driver is paid a competitive market rate by that I mean they are neither underpaid nor overpaid, they are paid the correct going rate based on supply and demand. SR could not afford to sack all its drivers because there is a shortage of drivers and not enough trained up drivers. Drivers could find a job elsewhere but you have the obvious costs of relocation and pension ties.
One thing I have not quite understood, what is the government involvement in this? Surely they should just give SR a good reprimand and tell them that they are going to land a fine equivalent to a year's earnings. If there are clear safety issues and they are not being addressed then SR are not doing their job.
SR is a privately owned company. 100% owned by GTR, which is 100% owned by Govia, which is 65% owned by Go-Ahead (a FTSE250 company with global reaches) and 35% Keolis (a French transport company). There is no government ownership.
I don't give a stuff to be perfectly honest - you pay for a service, you should receive it. Drivers get paid very (very) well for the job they do, there is no justification whatsoever for screwing up people's careers and lives by going on strike for spurious "safety" reasons. Unions are just agitators.
I'll qualify that by saying I'm not naive enough to believe the unions are the only issue, but it's an entirely unnecessary extra layer of crap which causes people huge inconvenience.
I'll qualify that by saying I'm not naive enough to believe the unions are the only issue, but it's an entirely unnecessary extra layer of crap which causes people huge inconvenience.
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff