How to fix the Southern Rail dispute?
Discussion
Did you pass through the Philadelphia Experiment to reach this thread?tight5 said:
ASLEF say "The shock rise – which was not announced to hard-pressed commuters – is on top of the inflation-busting 3.6% annual increase due in January."
Meanwhile... "Southern has offered drivers a five-year deal, instead of four as in previous offers, which would mean a 28.5 per cent pay increase by 2020. This would put them on £62,966, an increase of £13,965 — but most drivers work regular overtime, adding up to 20 per cent, taking pay to more than £75,000." (Evening Standard).
I wonder how their 'inflation-busting' salary rises get paid?
While that is a s
tty thing for GTR to do to be fair I think it right to point out that the fares going to government does not change the fact that its not simply the train company or government behind the fare increase.
Reality is fare increase will reflect cost to operate for the government. If GTR's operational costs rise they charge the government more to run their service and as such the government needs the fares to go up to cover that cost.
I work private sector providing services to public sector so understand the financials of the way it works well.
tty thing for GTR to do to be fair I think it right to point out that the fares going to government does not change the fact that its not simply the train company or government behind the fare increase.Reality is fare increase will reflect cost to operate for the government. If GTR's operational costs rise they charge the government more to run their service and as such the government needs the fares to go up to cover that cost.
I work private sector providing services to public sector so understand the financials of the way it works well.
NDA said:
ASLEF say "The shock rise – which was not announced to hard-pressed commuters – is on top of the inflation-busting 3.6% annual increase due in January."
Meanwhile... "Southern has offered drivers a five-year deal, instead of four as in previous offers, which would mean a 28.5 per cent pay increase by 2020. This would put them on £62,966, an increase of £13,965 — but most drivers work regular overtime, adding up to 20 per cent, taking pay to more than £75,000." (Evening Standard).
I wonder how their 'inflation-busting' salary rises get paid?
Through the purchase of Drivers; T+Cs, as a head honcho of SR said on TV when the dispute was settled; the pay element was self-funded.Meanwhile... "Southern has offered drivers a five-year deal, instead of four as in previous offers, which would mean a 28.5 per cent pay increase by 2020. This would put them on £62,966, an increase of £13,965 — but most drivers work regular overtime, adding up to 20 per cent, taking pay to more than £75,000." (Evening Standard).
I wonder how their 'inflation-busting' salary rises get paid?
anonymous said:
[redacted]
I'd hazard a guess that you will be long gone before a majority of trains are running fully automated without a driver so I wouldn't worry too much.30 years on and a low speed light rail system designed from scratch to run without a 'driver' means nothing in the grand scheme of things although it won't stop people making the ridiculous comparison...
Using ERTMS trials on a small line in the middle of nowhere as an example of 'progress' towards no-driver operation does your argument no favours. There are still huge gaps in GSMR coverage and operation!
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Ahh, the DLR that has no driver. Brilliant isn't it? Except for the fact that every train must have a passenger service agent on board (train captain) who takes over the train in a variety of situations such as when it's ATO system has a 'moment' which is more often than you think and these staff can and have gone on strike and brought the system to a standstill. But they're only there because unions, init! Well it the ORR that demands they are there and even if you managed to get rid you still have signallers, controllers, power control, maintainance, etc,etc all who can walk out and bring it to a standstill. In fact it would be worse as you're putting a lot more power in the hands of a lot fewer workers who know the power they wield.
Bringing Full ATO to the mainline would takes decades at a cost that would make HS2 look good value. On the Tube, which is relatively contained, the Jubilee line cost over £600m and 4-5 years to implement. The 4LM project (Met,H&C,District,circle) is costing billions and again is taking many years to bring to fruition and it still doesn't get rid of the drivers. This will take new trains costing billions more.
Now extrapolate the cost of converting a few hundred miles of underground track to the many thousands of miles of the mainline and you see the problem and this is before you start dealing with the myriad of TOCs, Roscos, network rail, DfT, etc and it's far easier and no doubt cheaper to bung a driver in the front and tell him to get on with it.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Your first point - that old kit (I was a Sinclair fan btw) doesn't really come with the liability and safety implications of running a safe national railway system - I like wild anaologies, that's one of the best so far.Your question has been answered already by someone trained to do the job and knows all about RTC and SA - it gives the ability to read what's written
The Cambrian trials are for the testing and possible implementation of ERTMS and I'm sure you'll have heard about the ongoing issues but you seem to be correlating an automatic in-cab signalling system designed to increase (much needed) capacity on a Victorian railway system with driverless trains.
A mistake easily made by the union haters without a clue as to how railways work but I thought you had an interest and a little understanding?
NomduJour said:
It wasn’t the technology - privately-funded, zero GLC involvement, no massively-overpaid unionised militants to deal with.
Oooo, what's this?http://rmtlondoncalling.org.uk/DLR
Anything else you wish to get wrong?
legzr1 said:
NomduJour said:
It wasn’t the technology - privately-funded, zero GLC involvement, no massively-overpaid unionised militants to deal with.
Oooo, what's this?http://rmtlondoncalling.org.uk/DLR
Anything else you wish to get wrong?
valiant said:
Was it privately funded? I thought it was the LDDC (London Docklands Development thingy - a government quango) who stumped up the original money to start construction of the first phase. Happy to be proved wrong!
Perhaps the on-board staff are massively overpaid - surely at least one point in his mini rant has to be based on fact doesn't it?valiant said:
Was it privately funded? I thought it was the LDDC (London Docklands Development thingy - a government quango) who stumped up the original money to start construction of the first phase. Happy to be proved wrong!
Yes, I should more accurately have said entirely designed and built by the private sector - deliberately so to avoid Livingstone being involved, and the driverless aspect was also a deliberate choice to minimise union disruption. Appears the initial construction funding came from the DoE and DoT; the LDDC took over the running of it from London Transport in 1992. NomduJour said:
Yes, I should more accurately have said entirely designed and built by the private sector - deliberately so to avoid Livingstone being involved, and the driverless aspect was also a deliberate choice to minimise union disruption. Appears the initial construction funding came from the DoE and DoT; the LDDC took over the running of it from London Transport in 1992.
How does that fit in with the fact that DLR cannot operate without the 'captain' and these 'captains' are members of the RMT?NomduJour said:
It was a (pretty successful) attempt to minimise union interference, not eliminate it.
Maybe nowadays the safety regulator might rationally decide that the public wouldn’t need the “reassurance” of some bloke pretending to do something.
So you've gone from "no militants to deal with" to "attempt to minimise union interference'" in a few posts.Maybe nowadays the safety regulator might rationally decide that the public wouldn’t need the “reassurance” of some bloke pretending to do something.
You didn't click the link I posted earlier did you? The one detailing issues of RMT vs management reneging on agreements. It's quite a list.
I'd love to see how the sheep behave when their 25mph rocketship service comes to a grinding halt because the decision was made to remove all staff. Rationally decide my arse!
How much does a train captain on DLR earn and how much should they be paid in your opinion?
No googling, you should have the figures to hand after making stupid claims in earlier posts.
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff