On 2 Jan 2017 at 10:59pm Newms wrote:
Am I right in thinking , that in addition to the RMT strikes days we are now in a position whereby any day is potentially not happening due to work to rule by Aslef ?
What they seem to do is make sure the journey home is prevented by hook or by crook so its not much good actually getting a train. in the first place
So as I understand it we are are basically getting no service thanks to our lovely union friends ?
Can we really be in for another year of this ?
On 2 Jan 2017 at 11:20pm Argus wrote:
Go back to argus where you belong
On 2 Jan 2017 at 11:21pm Clifford wrote:
Paul, why do you think the RMT and the rail companies in Scotland managed to get an agreement but it's not been possible with Southern? Do you think the government's anti-union agenda may have something to do with it?
Check it out here »
On 2 Jan 2017 at 11:49pm clare wrote:
The Union and Southern brokered a deal several months ago. Southern said they just needed to pass it by the government in a telephone call. The answer came back -NO!
This is a politically motivated scenario where taxpayers are even forking out for the compensation bills. It's part of a neoliberal fight to the death designed to put wealth firmly in the hands of the multinational rich.
Surely there is enough evidence for us to now know that under this government there is no hope ultimately for any security and dignity for any workers.
On 3 Jan 2017 at 6:14am Newms wrote:
I see , well aside form the local loons does anyone who actually needs to get to work got any input
I have now discover that every train has been cancelled between 6.00 AM and 7.20 AM. They just don`t exist so even if the trains are running they are not running for most of the rush hour/s
I am not going to renew my season ticket its pointless , not yet anyway ,its a nightmare for us
Another year same old ......fantastic
On 3 Jan 2017 at 10:04am Mark wrote:
Thus speaks Newsman. Our official local loon.
On 3 Jan 2017 at 10:12am ThinkAboutIt wrote:
If you work in London, then you should live in London.
Stop living down here, pushing local house prices up and then moaning about the train service. We don't want to hear you moaning about the commute disruption.
Have you heard about the conspiracy theory that the train strikes are to deter Londoners from living in in Lewes ha ha ha!!!
On 3 Jan 2017 at 10:27am Saunders wrote:
Well, we are thinking of moving back to London as this is not right! Lewes is not that great, so dont mind moving back. Really bored here.
On 3 Jan 2017 at 11:02am Commuter wrote:
Spot the troll.
What about people who rely on trains to get to their workplaces elsewhere in Sussex?
Besides which point me to all the affordable family homes in London with half decent schools nearby.
On 3 Jan 2017 at 11:06am Clifford wrote:
Newms wrote: 'I see , well aside form the local loons...'
Oh dear Paul, many a true word, eh? Good to see you back though. We've missed your particular brand of out-of-touch lunacy.
On 3 Jan 2017 at 12:07pm Chester Packov-Lyze wrote:
@Clifford - speak for yourself about Paul. Totally agree with you and Clare about who is responsible for the strikes continuing.
On 3 Jan 2017 at 12:19pm AnotherCommuter wrote:
@ThinkAboutIt - let me tell you a bit about me.
Born & raised in Lewes.
Lived away for a bit.
Moved back ten years ago, got a job in Brighton. Had children, bought house, had children, who are at local state schools.
Two years ago, offered a very good job in London. Took it. Became a long distance commuter.
What am I supposed to do?
On 3 Jan 2017 at 12:20pm Clifford wrote:
Chester, it's what's known as a back-handed compliment. We need to see the ravings of the right-wing to remind us how irrelevant they are to real life as most people live it.
On 3 Jan 2017 at 1:22pm Alec wrote:
Paul and other neo-liberals love the EU and hate the unions... not really surprising
From RMT:
Under the proposals in the EU’s so-called Fourth Railway Package, train operators would have complete access to the networks of member states to operate domestic passenger services.
The European Council had already agreed that mandatory competitive tendering should be the main way of awarding public service contracts.
RMT general secretary Mick Cash said that the failed Tory privatisation of rail over twenty years ago using EU directive 91/440 was now being imposed on 500 million people by EU diktat without a mandate.
“This rail package is designed to privatise railways across Europe and its proposals are remarkably similar to the McNulty report on the future of GB railways, imposing further fragmentation and attacks on workers.
“McNulty, the Tory government and the EU share the business-led mania for privatisation and agree on the need to jack up fares and attack jobs, pay and pensions to pay for it, no-one has voted for that.
On 3 Jan 2017 at 1:59pm pointless wrote:
sloshing the word 'neoliberal' around as a pejorative isn't very helpful - I'm sure you know what it means Alec but I suspect a lot of people who use it would struggle to give a good explanation of it without resorting to wikipedia.
There are obviously massive issues with rail privitisation as we have it, and with the government's handling of this franchise and wilful escalation of the current industrial issues.
I wholly support the unions in maintaining safety standards and doing their best for their members. I can see they need to draw a line somewhere and I also think it's important to maintain the presence of guards on the trains.
However, there is an obvious issue with their stance on conductors/guards and doors, namely that the same train line has near identical services running up and down, operated ultimately by the same company (albeit under the Thameslink banner) and apparently without objection by the unions, and without obvious jeopardy to customers.
There may well be differences between the two services, or perhaps the unions feel that it's too late to address Thameslink but that doesn't mean giving up on Southern. The problem I have is that they haven't effectively articulated or even addressed these differences - in fact they are nearly always hopeless when speaking on the radio etc, even facing the open goal that is Chris Grayling. as a lefty, it's frustrating that the left have such a problem with media relations.
Can someone explain to me what the difference is from Thameslink? It's an honest question and not a rhetorical one.
On 3 Jan 2017 at 3:37pm Angel wrote:
Pointless, if you are on Facebook, I point you in the direction if the Association of British Commuters page - all commuters - who are able to tell you why there is a dispute on Sourhern about DOO . Southern have signally failed in recruiting, training and retaining train drivers from the start if their franchise. The whole service relies on overtime, which drivers are not contractually obliged to do. If the company had staffed the railway properly they wouldn't have the continuing problem. It's what happens when you treat staff badly and goodwill evaporates.
On 3 Jan 2017 at 3:57pm Just Bob wrote:
Perhaps they could bring a few workers on their inaugural trip to replace the troublemakers that have lost the will to work for a living.
Check it out here »
On 3 Jan 2017 at 4:39pm Clifford wrote:
Just Bob, Yes China (and North Korea) will warm the heart of most of our democratically minded Tories because free trade unions and strikes are illegal and anyone who tries to form a free trade union is imprisoned. A Tory wet dream.
On 3 Jan 2017 at 10:38pm 57 strands wrote:
Remember the unions fight for workers rights and passenger safety, lets not forget this.
On 4 Jan 2017 at 7:10am Newms wrote:
Gives you some idea how bad this forum has got .Thousands of people are unable to get to work ,families are at their wits end and the MP claims it is her top post item above Brexit by a long long way
On this forum the only comments are...well , of no interest to me anyway
Never mind
On 4 Jan 2017 at 9:33am Angel wrote:
Newman - seems you're only interested in hearing a reflection of your own views. Maybe you need to
1. Get out of your bubble more, 2. Be more succinct.
Many of your previous posts are long, meandering, incoherent and frankly, boring.
On 4 Jan 2017 at 10:34am pointless wrote:
thanks Angel for your response. I think I have a good grasp of why relations between Southern and their staff are so bad. I also understand Southern's poor administration of the franchise in terms of investment and staffing.
None of this explains why the DOO issue applies to Southern and not Thameslink. That's what I'm curious about. The strikes are being justified by the unions by reference to the specific issue of DOO trains - not the wider investment/management issues.
If the strike is really about these wider issues, the unions shouldn't hide it behind a spurious safety issue (if that's what they're doing), because being disingenuous will not win them support.
On 4 Jan 2017 at 10:43am Town Flyer wrote:
I believe the answer as to why the DOO issue applies to Southern and not Thameslink lies in the type and shape of the platforms that they serve. Southern have a much bigger network than Thameslink, with many more 'outlying' stations that have worse visibility for the drivers.
On 4 Jan 2017 at 1:08pm Meic wrote:
-> Pointless
Thameslink trains stop only at a small number of long straight platforms, of uniform height. This makes them inherently less dangerous.
Many other platforms are of varying heights and lengths, with bends, and Southern trains have to deal with this. Before I retired and stopped commuting I several times witness cases where serious injury (or worse) was averted by the vigilance of the guards.
On 4 Jan 2017 at 1:44pm ThinkAboutIt wrote:
@AnotherCommuter
You've sold your soul
On 4 Jan 2017 at 6:01pm EU know the answer wrote:
Employ drivers and guards from Eastern Europe. They would collectively be grateful to earn part of the wages paid to one overpaid whinging driver or conductor/guard.
Complete the deal by making overpaid ego maniac union troublemakers illegal.
On 5 Jan 2017 at 11:59am Andymac wrote:
So based on a couple of posts above, the union justification for their different attitude to Thameslink and Southern Trains is that for DOO trains the Southern network stations are inherently 'riskier' than the Thameslink network stations because of station configuration, platform length etc. So presumably the unions have some kind of objective expert third party risk studies or assessments comparing the two networks to back up this assertion and justify the immense chaos and disruption their industrial action is causing? If they have this evidence, where is it? If they haven't, can they please stop making things up to suit their case? If you were a cynic (which of course I'm not), it might make you think that this is just another union porky to cover up their shameless attempt to retain their power to bring the trains to a halt when they don't get what they want.
On 5 Jan 2017 at 9:13pm Local commuter wrote:
Local Conservative MP Maria Caulfield gave the game away in an email to a local rail user group. She told them that she has been talking to both sides behind the scenes and found the Unions quite reasonable to talk to as they were prepared to enter negotiations with no preconditions, but was disappointed that Southern/Govia were the ones who were being difficult about resolving the dispute. If that is the assessment from a Conservative MP (albeit one who is a bit independent minded, new, not yet wrapped up in the whole political career patronage game) then we can conclude that the blame for this continuing lies with the company and with a Government who will not intervene.
On 5 Jan 2017 at 9:27pm Sceptical Green wrote:
Anyone remember the Clapham Rail disaster where hundreds more lives would have been lost if the guard of one of the trains had not had the safety training that is proposed not to be given to new conductors? He went and did train protection ( in those days it was warning detonators on the line to alert a following driver) so that no further trains could run into the crashed ones in a situation where the signal fault meant it was not turning red to stop more trains going through. What happens on a driver only train if the driver has a heart attack or if there is a fire that prevents him accessing the passengers or taking charge of evacuation? It's all wonderful to expect new technology to solve all our problems but niaive to think that rail companies won't cut corners on safety to increase profits if they can get away with it. That has been a factor in nearly every rail crash in the last 50 years.