Jump to content
 

Southern Rail Franchise


Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Premium

It happened mid franchise, TUPE only applies when the franchise is re-let.

 

The whole situation stank to high heaven but it was all (very cleverly) done within the rules.

 

As I always say, it doesnt matter what is written down but what isnt written down and is open to interpretation.

 

Ah OK TUPE only applies when a business changes hands (e.g. in a franchise change) but here they were transferring between existing businesses. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Lets also remember the Southern on board Catering staff that 'transferred' to Rail Gourmet and were made redundant the following week after the contract was terminated, as the staff had only been employed for a week (the transfer was classed as a new start, no PTR&R for caterers) they were simply given their P45s and told to pi um go away, there is zero trust in the Management (actually the DaFT if you peel away the layers of cow manure) from the staff in this dispute.

 

Every other DOO scheme in England has resulted on the complete removal of the second person on the train within a few years of implementation, I see no reasons (or guarantees) why this one would be any different.

Interestingly, the up-coming more demanding accessibility law relating to rail travel should ensure some sort of on-board staff provision, at least on trains that call at any unmanned stations. It will be very interesting to see how the affected TOCs and the DfT try to wriggle out of that. 

 

What I think is going on at present is designed to get rid of guards and whatever grade they are displaced into before that happens. Then whatever on-board assistants Southern et al are forced to provide may be taken on under the worst possible conditions of employment. 

 

John

Edited by Dunsignalling
Link to post
Share on other sites

Interestingly, the up-coming more demanding accessibility law relating to rail travel should ensure some sort of on-board staff provision, at least on trains that call at any unmanned stations. 

 

It will be very interesting to see how the affected TOCs and the DfT try to wriggle out of that. 

 

John

We are patiently waiting for it to be tried in Court, there have been enough high profile mess ups by the railway (not just Southern) for it to be tested, I am actually surprised that somebody hasnt already done so.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Interestingly, the up-coming more demanding accessibility law relating to rail travel should ensure some sort of on-board staff provision, at least on trains that call at any unmanned stations. 

 

It will be very interesting to see how the affected TOCs and the DfT try to wriggle out of that. 

 

John

 

On Southern stations I used recently, the customer help/emergency points had been re-branded to include requesting assistance in boarding as one of their functions.

 

I don't know what sort of help it summons at an unmanned station.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On Southern stations I used recently, the customer help/emergency points had been re-branded to include requesting assistance in boarding as one of their functions.

 

I don't know what sort of help it summons at an unmanned station.

Maybe Southern have invented Star Trek style transporters and a member of station staff is beamed in to where they are requested.

Other than that I think the whole concept of having to request assistance in this way is pretty useless, I mean what sort of timescales would we be talking about here?

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's one thing that I don't think is acceptable. There should be staff available (other than the driver) for every arrival/departure from a station. If those staff are station or train based is less the issue - East Croydon platform staff would probably be more efficient, on the Arun valley line for example, having them on the trains would make more sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Maybe Southern have invented Star Trek style transporters and a member of station staff is beamed in to where they are requested.

Other than that I think the whole concept of having to request assistance in this way is pretty useless, I mean what sort of timescales would we be talking about here?

 

Quite.

 

The only thing that would start to make sense would be for the driver to be informed that they were going to have to get out of the cab to assist.

 

But putting any other practical considerations aside, I don't know how the message would get to the driver and even if it did it would probably be too late.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite.

 

The only thing that would start to make sense would be for the driver to be informed that they were going to have to get out of the cab to assist.

 

But putting any other practical considerations aside, I don't know how the message would get to the driver and even if it did it would probably be too late.

For the driver to assist would mean contacting the controlling signaller to inform them you are leaving the cab (might require signals to be put back, level crossings raised etc), shut the cab down and remove the master key, physically leave the cab and assist the passenger on or off, go back to the cab and key back in, set up the TMS, OTMR etc contact the signaller to inform them you are back in the cab and ready to depart, get the signal and go.

 

How long would that little lot take bearing in mind the present day, complex timetable?

There is also the problem of persons working alone etc, I dont know how the legislation would impact on that, currently it wouldnt apply because there is always a second person (the driver) available when platform staff or guards are putting passengers on or off the train!

Edited by royaloak
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

For the driver to assist would mean contacting the controlling signaller to inform them you are leaving the cab (might require signals to be put back, level crossings raised etc), shut the cab down and remove the master key, physically leave the cab and assist the passenger on or off, go back to the cab and key back in, set up the TMS, OTMR etc contact the signaller to inform them you are back in the cab and ready to depart, get the signal and go.

 

How long would that little lot take bearing in mind the present day, complex timetable?

 

Well those were the "practical considerations" I was putting aside...my point being that even if wasn't for all the rigmarole you have described, I still don't see how it would work.

 

But putting any other practical considerations aside, I don't know how the message would get to the driver and even if it did it would probably be too late.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well those were the "practical considerations" I was putting aside...my point being that even if wasn't for all the rigmarole you have described, I still don't see how it would work.

I was merely putting up what a pain in the derriere it is for us to leave the cab, it isnt just a question of jumping out, putting the ramp down, shove them on or off, stow the ramp, jump back in the cab and away.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

 

 

Now I am not trying to be funny but how would you feel if the company you work for were being restructured and you were offered a much 'lesser' job than the one you do now?

 

It happened on BR all the time - to hundreds if not thousands of people.  Sometimes you were lucky and 'got something out of it' with a reorganisation but large numbers of people were simply slotted into a post whether they wanted it or not - one one occasion I was redundant in one post and slotted into another 80 miles away with much longer travelling time (despite the fact I lived halfway between the two) plus a very likely future additional Income Tax liability so I jumped at the chance when I was offered another job in a completely different field but still two grades adrift from my own although in the same place.

 

Ging back many years I knew one chap who had been made redundant over 50 times in the space of a few years and had made at least four house moves as a consequence finishing up moving from his native north west England to the Thames Valley doing something completely different from any of his previous jobs - his case was exceptional but overall not particularly unusual in terms of having to move.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

I was merely putting up what a pain in the derriere it is for us to leave the cab, it isnt just a question of jumping out, putting the ramp down, shove them on or off, stow the ramp, jump back in the cab and away.

 

Fair enough.

 

I can see why there might be a need to shut the cab down, but I'm curious as to why the signaller needs to take action when the driver leaves the cab though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Earlier this week I travelled from Waterloo to Reading by South West Trains, an 80 minute journey. Although the Conductor/Guard made several announcements regarding their location in the 8-car train, they did not once come through the train, to check tickets, or assist elderly or frail passengers.

 

Regarding redundancy, in 1987 I was given 5 months notice by BR after my job was re-organised; I ended up keeping a job but several grades lower, in a role and a location which I would never have voluntarily applied for, and I had to move house to get there for the shifts. I am not aware that Southern has actually threatened compulsory redundancy however ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair enough.

 

I can see why there might be a need to shut the cab down, but I'm curious as to why the signaller needs to take action when the driver leaves the cab though.

There might be a level crossing with the barriers already down so they would probably be lifted, there might be a junction up ahead which would be set for your train but in a few minuted there would be another train booked over it so the signaller might give that one priority, there might be another train booked to use that platform in a few minutes which might need o be re-platformed etc, all to minimise overall delays to everyone, oh and every time we leave the cab its written in the rule book that we have to inform the signaller in case they need to contact us for anything.

Edited by royaloak
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Not yet, that will happen in 2019 or 2020 when the OBS role is done away with.

 

Correction.

 

MAY happen in 2019 when the next franchise takes effect. A lot can happen between now and then - the issue if assistance for disabled travellers could well make it to the courts by that time forcing the retention of the role.

 

What I do suspect will happen though is an increased 'casualisation' of the role and a gradual decline in wages + T&Cs compared to what the grade of 'Guard' would have been able to achieve.due the the effective removal of strike action to make a difference.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Lets also remember that the method of operation for DOO trains when introduced over 30 years ago is very different than the methods used today or proposed for 'tomorrow'.

 

30 years ago the second the train started to move the PTI (as it is now called)  was no longer the drivers responsibility, if somebody went down the gap it was basically tough, nowadays even if the train doesnt move the person responsible can find themseves in Court (see the latest Mersey Rail incident which keeps getting adjourned).

On the IET it was proposed that the bodyside cameras and screens would remain on and monitored (by the driver) while any part of the train was in the platform, that didnt happen 30 years ago, or Today for that matter so its another change being made to the operation to suit/fudge the modern scenario!

 

30 years ago there simply werent the passenger numbers we are carrying today (in fact passenger numbers were in free fall) resulting in platform crowding etc increasing the chances of somebody getting pushed into the side of the train etc.

 

30 years ago there were problems recruiting (quality) staff due to the poor wages and working conditions, that is now no longer the case (although having to go to bed before my 10 year old Son or the alarm going off at 02:30 for a 04:00 start is still pretty crappy).

 

30 years ago it was done with screens or mirrors on the platform offering a half decent viewing angle, now it is done with bodyside cameras which offer a very shallow viewing angle, even LU uses platform mounted cameras because of the better view they offer.  If anyone is interested 30 years it wasnt permitted to have train mounted or narrow angle platform mounted cameras because of the narrow field of view they offered, something removed from the instructions like various other inconvenient things have been over the years.

 

The methods of operation 30 years ago are very different to what happens today but everyone likes to think its exactly the same, 5 minutes research would show that to be the case, although any reference to the methods of working when DOO was introduced are strangely absent even though they were available about 5 years ago, very strange!

 

None of this proves DOO is unsafe in principle.

 

As it happens I agree that platform mounted kit does provide a better view to drivers than in cab equipment (particularly for long trains), for the reasons you give - but can also see why the DfT have taken the stance they have in that all that platform kit adds more stuff for NR to maintain. Given they have NR in their sights for cost savings too it fits with the wider McNulty agenda.

 

That doesn't mean the DfT are correct - and if the RMT were smart about things, rather than banging on with their 'DOO is unsafe' nonsense they would actually be saying 'The variant of DOO the DfT is pushing through is unsafe' - and would be willing to compromise if external DOO equipment was provided say for 8 and 12 car trains (with on board kit optimised to cope with 4 cars only)

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Correction.

 

MAY happen in 2019 when the next franchise takes effect. A lot can happen between now and then - the issue if assistance for disabled travellers could well make it to the courts by that time forcing the retention of the role.

 

What I do suspect will happen though is an increased 'casualisation' of the role and a gradual decline in wages + T&Cs compared to what the grade of 'Guard' would have been able to achieve.due the the effective removal of strike action to make a difference.

You are of course correct, but going on what has happened with every other DOO scheme in England I (unfortunately) think I will be proved right, unless access for all legislation leads to as you say a casualisation and down grading of the role, can you remind me who is it that writes the legislation again?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If TOCs had full crew working (as SWT has at weekends and were working towards during the week, when I left them) then if you have a driver then you automatically have a guard because they start together, work the same trains together and finish together, unlike it is wher I am now where I could have 5 or 6 different guards in a shift.

How would you feel if you liked your job as a guard but were then told you were going to be sweeping the platforms because you had been 'displaced', the Company have offered you an alternative role so they have kept their end of the bargain, if you decide you dont want it then you are making yourself unemployed so no redundancy payment for you.

 

DBS/EWS did similar a few years back when they had too many drivers in Scotland, they offered some of them alternative employment in the South East, none of the staff took the offer up and so effectively made themselves redundant, I think they got paid redundancy but it was reduced by quite a large amount because they had been offered alternative employment but didnt take it.

 

Now I am not trying to be funny but how would you feel if the company you work for were being restructured and you were offered a much 'lesser' job than the one you do now?

 

Happened to me twice in BR (it was called "displaced" then), once in supervisory grade and once in management grade, both due to reorganisations. In the first, my job disappeared completely (moved from SM's and ASM's to Traffic Managers, and far fewer of them), and I had to spend 6 months sitting in an office doing a job two grades below until a TM's job became vacant (but I did learn an awful lot about how Area offices worked, which came in useful later). In the latter, due to sectorisation, I moved from a front line job in charge of c.400 people to an office job looking after 5 (but perversely a much bigger budget). Again, I just sought promotion until it came. Under privatisation, I rose meteorically, but again was "displaced" but resolved it by moving from Yorkshire to London. It is not pleasant but it is by no means anything new. As long as pay and conditions are maintained (for a limited period IIRC), the initial embarrassment quickly goes away and one keeps looking for a way back up.

 

The ones that we should worry about are those dismissed through compulsory redundancy. That has only happened to me twice. Once in the US when I was still very young, but I had to come back to Blighty and start again. The second was at the end of my career, and I knew it was coming when I took the job (London Olympics Delivery), but it was still an emotional shock when it hit you that it was over. In neither case did I suffer great hardship, but the effect on those with families, mortgages/ high rents, is devastating.

 

I note the discussion has moved on the merits of having a second person at all on a train (or at every station), door operation duties or not. This is perhaps a more useful discussion, and the impact of the increasing case law on the DDA provisions are pertinent. The bus industry had its first big shock just a week or so ago, and it is struggling to deal with the practicalities. The key issue will be whether it is "reasonably equal treatment" to force the disabled to wait for assistance to arrive, or to have to book in advance. The railways have been legally challenged many times on physical access on this basis, and successfully in many cases, but the only issues, of which I am aware so far, on the matter of human assistance have been complaints and not legal challenges. I am not sure why the difference, but the interpretation of "reasonable" also covers costs, and if there is a very significant cost to compliance, then the law tends to allow for non-compliance. That is probably the only sensible thing to do. So I am not sure where the law stands if conductors are withdrawn on lines with unstaffed stations, which were previously available to the disabled without pre-booking. In other words, their access is reduced. This may not be tolerated by the law. Who knows?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

If TOCs had full crew working (as SWT has at weekends and were working towards during the week, when I left them) then if you have a driver then you automatically have a guard because they start together, work the same trains together and finish together, unlike it is wher I am now where I could have 5 or 6 different guards in a shift.

How would you feel if you liked your job as a guard but were then told you were going to be sweeping the platforms because you had been 'displaced', the Company have offered you an alternative role so they have kept their end of the bargain, if you decide you dont want it then you are making yourself unemployed so no redundancy payment for you.

 

DBS/EWS did similar a few years back when they had too many drivers in Scotland, they offered some of them alternative employment in the South East, none of the staff took the offer up and so effectively made themselves redundant, I think they got paid redundancy but it was reduced by quite a large amount because they had been offered alternative employment but didnt take it.

 

Now I am not trying to be funny but how would you feel if the company you work for were being restructured and you were offered a much 'lesser' job than the one you do now?

 

Not being funny, this shows just what a sheltered life railway staff have had over the past few decades.

 

In the wider economy it is now taken for granted that jobs will be short term things with many changes of employer and role required throughout your working life. A Conservative minister once remarked somewhat forcefully that if you were made redundant you should 'get on your bike and chase work across the country of necessary. More recently we have heard the phrase the 'Gig Economy' where again stable and permanent employment doesn't exist - it all being about making as much money as you can in one job before moving on (be that through choice or forced to do so).

 

As such its something of a tall order getting the public to support actions seeking to minimise exposure of railway staff to this environment - Given most companies have long since dumped their final salary pensions schemes and lots of people got not pay rise at all during the post 2008 recession it is actually quite difficult to build a case that railway employees should be treated differently.

 

For the avoidance of doubt I deplore these sorts of employment strategies as they rarely bring out the best in employers or employees, but the fact is that is the way the wider economy works in 2017.

 

It is what it is as Sherlock / Watson were observing in the latest series.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not being funny, this shows just what a sheltered life railway staff have had over the past few decades.

The only problem with that statement is that I havent been on the railways for decades, I spent most of my working life in the wider economy where funnily enough when times were good and customer numbers increasing the companies sought to employ more staff to deal with them not less as the present government is expecting the railways to do!

 

Anyway have to go because we are having a few friends round for a few lot of drinks,TTFN.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only problem with that statement is that I havent been on the railways for decades, I spent most of my working life in the wider economy where funnily enough when times were good and customer numbers increasing the companies sought to employ more staff to deal with them not less as the present government is expecting the railways to do!

 

Anyway have to go because we are having a few friends round for a few lot of drinks,TTFN.

 

But railway industry staff have increased, and massively in the last 20 years. Those of us in BR remember ever decreasing establishment numbers and an inability to recruit even the numbers we were supposed to have. We got to a low of around 80,000 I think, but the last estimates I have seen suggest it is back up to about 110,000? (Purists will argue that it was once around 500,000, but that was in a time of much more labour intensive requirements, sprawling network, much greater use of freight, and ownership of hotels and ferries etc). What other longstanding industry has seen that kind of rise, with the possible exception of retailing? Many new industries have grown faster of course, but then that is the nature of new industries, if they are successful.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

There is no such thing as permanency of employment. There never was. I think few people want a job for life now, they may want to be in employment for their working life but that is a completely different concept from a job for life. Most people are fully aware that if their employment is a business relationship, they agree to sell their labour/expertise to a company which wants what they can offer but either party can change their position at any time. Just as employers can decide they don't need you so you can decide to do something else. My own feeling is that if my morale was as low as that of some rail workers, or my opinion of my employer was as low, then I'd look for another job and try and do something else.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

If TOCs had full crew working (as SWT has at weekends and were working towards during the week, when I left them) then if you have a driver then you automatically have a guard because they start together, work the same trains together and finish together, unlike it is wher I am now where I could have 5 or 6 different guards in a shift.

How would you feel if you liked your job as a guard but were then told you were going to be sweeping the platforms because you had been 'displaced', the Company have offered you an alternative role so they have kept their end of the bargain, if you decide you dont want it then you are making yourself unemployed so no redundancy payment for you.

 

DBS/EWS did similar a few years back when they had too many drivers in Scotland, they offered some of them alternative employment in the South East, none of the staff took the offer up and so effectively made themselves redundant, I think they got paid redundancy but it was reduced by quite a large amount because they had been offered alternative employment but didnt take it.

 

Now I am not trying to be funny but how would you feel if the company you work for were being restructured and you were offered a much 'lesser' job than the one you do now?

 

Its called real life. It happens - a lot. 

 

Tell me again why you should be exempted from it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...