Southern Rail Franchise

[Guest]

Ah yes, inner suburban where all the plartforms are staffed and the stations are quite close together.

 

I am sorry you dont like my opinion I wont trouble you again.

 

Your first line should read "where most of the platforms should be staffed but hey... the guy with the little white bat is nowhere to be seen". I inhabit the real world, not the make-believe utopia where everything works as it should.

As for your second line... I've already stated I have no problem with your opinion. The problem I have is reading it over and over and over and over and over and over again, quite often with a combatative undertone. Again, you don't like DOO. We get it.

[caradoc]

Having looked at the Merseyrail Guard case (the pending court case, not the earlier fatality) I can fully understand royaloak's concerns. Apart from the fact that the Guard is being prosecuted at all, there seems to have been no progress in the case since November 2015; If this is correct, to have had this hanging over this poor man for such a length of time is an absolute disgrace.

[great central]

The cynical view is that it's being held up awaiting resolution of the Southern dispute. Does that imply interference from a certain government department?

[Bruce Depot]

Not sure what another day of strike action will change?

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-sussex-38978773

[DavidLong]

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/feb/16/southern-rail-users-face-more-strikes-as-drivers-reject-aslef-backed-deal

 

David

[John M Upton]

Opens bag of pigeons...

Inserts cat...

Closes bag...

[Gwiwer]

A closer vote than perhaps some on the driver's side had anticipated though no doubt some drivers are feeling the pinch after so many days without pay.  But it shows there is fight left yet in the dispute and it should send a message to the DafT mob that further DOO(P) isn't going to be a pushover here or anywhere else.

[Zomboid]

I really can't see how this is ever going to be resolved. Both sides are so entrenched that I can only see it rumbling on and on and on...

[Claude_Dreyfus]

54.1% of 72.7% voted to reject the 'deal'. Remains to be seen whether or not this will translate into more strikes, but I presume it will. And before I get the old Chestnut; sure, our government was voted in with considerably less than 50% of the overall vote, but I, and the vast majority of the population have a say in an election. I have no say in this. I and countless others have been significantly disrupted by the last year or so...and these are in 'our' name. The strikes are mainly being pitched on safety grounds; presumably the passenger's safety.

 

Yes, I am frustrated. Yes. This this opinion is shared by many passengers.

[The Stationmaster]

A closer vote than perhaps some on the driver's side had anticipated though no doubt some drivers are feeling the pinch after so many days without pay.  But it shows there is fight left yet in the dispute and it should send a message to the DafT mob that further DOO(P) isn't going to be a pushover here or anywhere else.

 

The big hope is that it might persuade them that the first thing they should do is keep their noses and fingers out of interfering with railway operational matters - but regrettably I doubt that will be the consequence.

 

The strangest thing is the reaction of one politico who is calling for Southern etc to be taken under state control - he doesn't seem to realise that the involvement of DafT is part of the problem (and probably at the root of it all) and that is 'state control'.

[russ p]

I think if Peter wilkinson had been discredited and lost his job the vote may have gone the other way

[jjb1970]

The strangest thing is the reaction of one politico who is calling for Southern etc to be taken under state control - he doesn't seem to realise that the involvement of DafT is part of the problem (and probably at the root of it all) and that is 'state control'.

 

I find it genuinely mystifying why so many advocate nationalisation as a panacea for all the problems of the railway when so many of the problems stem from government interference and micro-management. The railways are already much closer to be state owned than private given that NR is a nationalised entity, DafT are micro-managing franchises and imposing the IEP on franchises along being largely responsible for this ruinous dispute (along with the unions). If the railways were returned to an arms length company with a strong board to keep civil servants and politicians interfering too much it might work but does anybody believe politicians and DafT are going to do that?

[Coryton]

I find it genuinely mystifying why so many advocate nationalisation as a panacea for all the problems of the railway when so many of the problems stem from government interference and micro-management. The railways are already much closer to be state owned than private given that NR is a nationalised entity, DafT are micro-managing franchises and imposing the IEP on franchises along being largely responsible for this ruinous dispute (along with the unions). If the railways were returned to an arms length company with a strong board to keep civil servants and politicians interfering too much it might work but does anybody believe politicians and DafT are going to do that?

 

I think the answer's quite simple - most people haven't got a clue how the railway works and don't realise that the railways in the UK are now controlled by the government to an extent never seen before in peacetime (and maybe even during the wars). And why should they? While it's easy enough to find out - for example - the incredible level of detail specified in a franchise ITT, most people aren't going to go looking; they just go by what they read in the papers which in general isn't very accurate.

 

(And maybe there are many things that I completely fail to understand about the UK because I've gone by what I've read in the papers rather than digging around for the truth).

[jjb1970]

(And maybe there are many things that I completely fail to understand about the UK because I've gone by what I've read in the papers rather than digging around for the truth).

 

That is the really frightening thing. We all rely on the media to inform us yet in most cases when I see a story I'm familiar with in the media it is quite normal for the media reporting to be rather disappointing. 

[Coryton]

That is the really frightening thing. We all rely on the media to inform us yet in most cases when I see a story I'm familiar with in the media it is quite normal for the media reporting to be rather disappointing. 

 

I'd say that was an understatement.

 

Almost every time I read an article in a newspaper about something I was personally involved in or know something about, it's full of errors.

 

So why should I believe the things I read in papers that I don't know about?

 

There is very good description here: https://seekerblog.com/2006/01/31/the-murray-gell-mann-amnesia-effect/

 

The advantage these days is that very often when you read news on-line there are people commenting who DO know what they are talking about. Of course not everything said in comments is true either, but it gives a lot more information than the reporter did and can often point out places to look for more accurate information.

 

Sometimes I treat the media as a way of flagging things that have happened so I know to look elsewhere. E.g. the mainstream media made me aware of the MH370 plane disappearance but I got my information on it elsewhere.

 

Getting back on topic, it's been interesting watching the views discussed here (to death!) about the DfT's role in the Southern dispute slowly creep into mainstream reporting. 

[lmsforever]

Listening to Mr Cash on the BBC yesterday I was stuck by his one subject obsession that he wishes us,hear, nationalisation ,safety,and the need for guards not a word as to how his members would benefit from improved earnings.It is beginning to sound a diatribe that is going nowhere and surely his members should have sussed that he is not interested in them only his political aims.As to ASLEF the mind boggles just why did they reject the offer no one has said why?The world is moving on and all over the world one man operation is carried out safely and indeed many of their members operate trains in the uk in this mode so its not untried.I regularily travel to London on omo trains and see no problems so why is Southern so different.It seems that this dispute is not motivated by safety but by politicaly motivated ones .It would not surprise me that if a certain party was in power this sad sorry dispute would not have happened.

[The Stationmaster]

That is the really frightening thing. We all rely on the media to inform us yet in most cases when I see a story I'm familiar with in the media it is quite normal for the media reporting to be rather disappointing. 

 

Perhaps the most frightening thing of all is that certain politicos are advocating it - leaves one wondering quite what they think it would achieve.

[jjb1970]

Perhaps the most frightening thing of all is that certain politicos are advocating it - leaves one wondering quite what they think it would achieve.

 

I'm not sure whether it is truly terrifying or comical that a chap that can't figure out how seats work on trains seems to consider himself ideally qualified to educate us all about why nationalisation of the railways would be a splendid idea.

[Gwiwer]

An interesting and well-written editorial in this month's issue of The Railway Magazine which does not mention Southern but alludes to the current situation.  This piece opines that nationwide the less able, and specifically those requiring assistance in order to travel, are receiving second-class service and a level of service which is deteriorating.  The suggestion is made that this could be considered unlawful within the terms of current legislation.

 

The argument is more pitched in terms of a second person on the train for customer assistance and reassurance than who closes the doors but we have discussed here before the potential for delay and loss of pathway when, for example, a wheelchair user wishes to board / alight from a DOO(P) train at a station which may or may not have platform staff.  Examples were cited where passengers were left to fend for themselves including having to crawl.  

 

What does the modern railway, where delay minute attribution seems to be a deity, do when the driver is required to exit the cab, deploy the ramp, endure perhaps a 2-minute station stop and delays several trains behind?  

[Wheatley]

Gwiwer, on 18 Feb 2017 - 00:26, said:

What does the modern railway, where delay minute attribution seems to be a deity, do when the driver is required to exit the cab, deploy the ramp, endure perhaps a 2-minute station stop and delays several trains behind?  

Builds the expected delay minutes and penalties into its budget for next year. One of the outputs of the delay minute attribution regime is that every TOC knows exactly how many minutes it loses to wheelchairs boarding and alighting.

[Gwiwer]

Scenario.  A wheelchair user wishes to board a train at Wivelsfield.  The station is staffed but the platforms are not attended.  Whether or not the person requires a travel assistant the net effect is the same.  There is a fair gap between platform and train which requires a ramp to be used.

 

Train stops.  20 seconds is the allowance.  Driver has to secure cab, leave cab, deploy ramp, passenger boards, ramp is stowed, driver returns to cab and prepares to depart.  This takes at least two and possibly three to four minutes.  In the meantime trains behind, which can be running on time but at very close intervals, sight caution or stop signals.  This potentially affects conflicting moves across Keymer Junction as well.   

 

The dwell time might be shortened if a second staff member were on the train whether or not that person is responsible for operating the doors / despatching the train.

 

Southern / GTR  and the unions haven't really grasped this nettle and neither have the other operators who have introduced DOO(P).  We have a mandated requirement to build trains with provision for disabled-access toilets and seating areas yet are making it harder for these people to actually travel on these trains.  

 

This isn't an entirely separate argument to the current disputes.  There is an overlap between a second crew member being carried for safety and for commercial / customer service duties.  One is not exclusive to the other.

[david.hill64]

Scenario.  A wheelchair user wishes to board a train at Wivelsfield.  The station is staffed but the platforms are not attended.  Whether or not the person requires a travel assistant the net effect is the same.  There is a fair gap between platform and train which requires a ramp to be used.

 

Train stops.  20 seconds is the allowance.  Driver has to secure cab, leave cab, deploy ramp, passenger boards, ramp is stowed, driver returns to cab and prepares to depart.  This takes at least two and possibly three to four minutes.  In the meantime trains behind, which can be running on time but at very close intervals, sight caution or stop signals.  This potentially affects conflicting moves across Keymer Junction as well.   

 

The dwell time might be shortened if a second staff member were on the train whether or not that person is responsible for operating the doors / despatching the train.

 

Southern / GTR  and the unions haven't really grasped this nettle and neither have the other operators who have introduced DOO(P).  We have a mandated requirement to build trains with provision for disabled-access toilets and seating areas yet are making it harder for these people to actually travel on these trains.  

 

This isn't an entirely separate argument to the current disputes.  There is an overlap between a second crew member being carried for safety and for commercial / customer service duties.  One is not exclusive to the other.

I commented earlier that I think that PRM access is going to be the deciding factor in manning levels rather than the RMT's spurious arguments about safety. For me I think the answer lies in manned platforms where possible, but I have to admit that this cannot be economic for less well used stations which are either going to have to close or TOCs will have to ensure that there are sufficient on-board staff to assist those in need.

[Zomboid]

I've been on a train with a guard where the boarding of a wheelchair took about 5 minutes against a scheduled dwell time of about 30 sec, because of the walking backwards and forwards to get the ramp, deploy it, get the person on, put the ramp back and then dispatch the train.

 

I don't think the other responsibilities of the person handling the ramp has any particular impact on that, the fact is the unless the platform heights and gaps match the train like on the DLR, loading and unloading a wheelchair will cause delays.

[The Stationmaster]

I commented earlier that I think that PRM access is going to be the deciding factor in manning levels rather than the RMT's spurious arguments about safety. For me I think the answer lies in manned platforms where possible, but I have to admit that this cannot be economic for less well used stations which are either going to have to close or TOCs will have to ensure that there are sufficient on-board staff to assist those in need.

 

Or the TOCs etc seek exemptions for certain stations.  Effectively they already do this buy pointing out that due to lack of access to platforms passengers with accessibility problems have no alternative but to make a roundabout journey or use another station.  

[Fenman]

I commented earlier that I think that PRM access is going to be the deciding factor in manning levels rather than the RMT's spurious arguments about safety. For me I think the answer lies in manned platforms where possible, but I have to admit that this cannot be economic for less well used stations which are either going to have to close or TOCs will have to ensure that there are sufficient on-board staff to assist those in need.

 

When it comes to station access, isn't the test one of "reasonableness"? To take an extreme example, it would probably cost billions and billions to make London Underground's central stations accessible; no-one thinks that that is a reasonable level of expenditure, and so exemptions will apply. Is it reasonable to ensure every train with lavatories has one of them wheelchair accessible? Yes, why not?

 

Paul