Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Southern Rail STRIKE details
- Thread starter Ernest
- Start date
No he's right. The suffering being caused to ordinary businesses and commuters, football fans, kids getting to school and pensioners off to their friends is now entirely disproportionate to the suffering caused by whether someone presses a button or not. SASTA are a disgrace, don't get me wrong, there is absolutely no excuse for their behaviour, but the longer this goes on the less good will the unions will have. I'd say their support is eroding daily. They need to start providing the services we've all paid for and find more constructive ways to take on SASTA. It's abundantly clear SASTA don't give a flying f***.
Ernest
Stupid IDIOT
- Thread starter
- #4,523
All the time the DfT/Government want to continue the war it will, you know the fight is being caused by them if it wasn't then this dispute would have been settled months ago. Wilkinson said he wanted to smash the railway unions and warned it might take years so you've only had a few months so unless they change there is no hope of things getting better, just worse when ASLEF join in.
If you want a service efficient safe railway for the customers you need more staff with Government subsidy
If you want a financially value for money railway for lower fares and profit for the shareholder the railways need less staff (or less wages).
Hence opposed views.
I don't think anybody believes the safety aspect is the root cause.
If you want a financially value for money railway for lower fares and profit for the shareholder the railways need less staff (or less wages).
Hence opposed views.
I don't think anybody believes the safety aspect is the root cause.
All along the unions have said this is about safety. If the majority of passengers start to say "actually I just want my service back, I'll take the risk thanks" then what's your mandate? I agree that this could have been settled a long while ago with the same deal that ScotRail got and that the hand of the DfT is all over the fact that is wasn't. However, the reason they can get away with it is because they suspect they can plug the line it's not all about safety. If it is then why do the drivers only join now? Why weren't they striking before?
Spiros
Well-known member
So why didn't the unions strike when Thameslink, C2C, Great Western, Chiltern, etc all introduced driver only operation? If DOO isn't safe now, then surely it wasn't safe then either?
If the unions had been all over this from the start then more people might have some sympathy with them. As it is, it just looks like good old fashioned 1970's style job protectionism. The only difference is that industrial action has traditionally been used to hurt the employers. In this case strikes are being held in the full knowledge that the employers don't give a shit and it's only the public being impacted
If the unions had been all over this from the start then more people might have some sympathy with them. As it is, it just looks like good old fashioned 1970's style job protectionism. The only difference is that industrial action has traditionally been used to hurt the employers. In this case strikes are being held in the full knowledge that the employers don't give a shit and it's only the public being impacted
It was too early to do the Christmas shopping?
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 35,332
yep, by the RMT simply agreeing to a set of procedures and rules for exception when the second safety trained person would be required. the union could then have ensured the rail company stuck to that agreement. as it is, there is no agreement, so Southern aren't bound by anything other than their whim when a second safety trained person is required. in their blind rejection of this condition, they have weakened their own hand for the future.
Common as Mook
Not Posh as Fook
- Jul 26, 2004
- 5,631
No-one has been able to give a coherent answer to this yet, which kind of proves your point I guess.
ROSM
Well-known member
Aslef had previously voted to strike but this had been cancelled following a injunction sought by gtr
Aslef voted again. Which is the strike that now happens
ROSM
Well-known member
From what I understand the main differences between then and now is that trains are longer and that it's noting being proposed for stations that are un manned
Also there have been a number of issues with drivers now having action taken against them for situations where passengers have been drag under trains etc
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 35,332
GTR trains are longer than most others on the network, and there's unmanned stations right across the Southern metro/Thameslink network. so thats not the reason.
Blue Valkyrie
Not seen such Bravery!
There are many more unmanned stations now ( staff cuts to boost shareholder profits and increase director bonuses rather than lower fares ).
Which means DOO is more of an issue.
I guess the unions have conceded they can't turn back the clock and reverse existing changes as no company will ditch DOO and get new rolling stock.
skipper734
Registered ruffian
I may not be as intelligent as Ernest, who obviously has a brain the size of a Planet. But I am older and have been watching these same futile Union actions since I was a little lad. Unions haven't won one yet, just helped destroy the industry they are supposed to support.
pearl
Well-known member
I think this earlier post sheds some light
Arthur
Well-known member
So it is about money then....at least for the drivers anyway.
Buzzer
Languidly Clinical
- Oct 1, 2006
- 26,121
Looks that way to me.
ROSM
Well-known member
The unmanming of stations is something that has increased significantly in last couple of years and thameslink trains used to be 4 or 8 coaches and are now 12