Current Affairs The Conservative Party

[tsubaki]

The RMT has been very effective in that regard though it shouldn't be considered as a purely good thing.

Part of protecting that privilege is making that job more valuable through scarcity (whether that be through restricting the number of drivers, imposing where they can strict regulations, striking whenever their hegemony is threatened).

This isn't always to the benefit of the paying passenger. In a lot of cases they actively makes things more expensive for all, as it is in the interests of their members, or cause huge disruption.

That is utter rubbish. The RMT does not, has not and could not restrict the number of drivers available to a TOC, and the regulations it "imposes" (or to be much more correct, "follows") are usually long established railway regulations that often have safety at their heart which the government and the firms are actively trying to get rid of - like the strikes against driver-only operation on Southern a while back, which were emphatically in the interests of the paying passenger (unless you think having a train with more than a thousand people on it with one member of staff aboard between stations is a good idea) as well as the employee (as the government weren't going to give them any more legal protection for the added responsibility they were told to accept).

 

[Bruce Wayne]

That is utter rubbish. The RMT does not, has not and could not restrict the number of drivers available to a TOC, and the regulations it "imposes" (or to be much more correct, "follows") are usually long established railway regulations that often have safety at their heart which the government and the firms are actively trying to get rid of - like the strikes against driver-only operation on Southern a while back, which were emphatically in the interests of the paying passenger (unless you think having a train with more than a thousand people on it with one member of staff aboard between stations is a good idea) as well as the employee (as the government weren't going to give them any more legal protection for the added responsibility they were told to accept).

The DLR has operated with that number of staff for years, and we're in a bizarre situation where tube drivers are paid a fortune to watch the train drive itself on several lines, just so they can be the hero in the extremely unlikely event of the train blowing up. I mean the unions have done a cracking job in squeezing the pip for their members, but lets not pretend that was done in anything but the self interest of them and their members.

 

[NilSatisOptimum]

How much has train drivers income gone up in that time?

The Union was very effective played the various private Train companies off each other after staff culling which led to shortage of experienced Train drivers, Short term profit long term cost... Oh dear! However, with 24 hour shift pattern, increase chance of serious health issues stacking up in later life....One driver pulling several hundred people and their very expensive tickets. Good for them.

Still it's only a good wage now in some parts of the country, others it will leave a family struggling struggling... Think we would have to look internationally to see if this wage holds its own worldwide..

And £200 million payed out to shareholders, down from some years ago but back on the upward trend, are you a shareholder?

 

[Bruce Wayne]

The Union was very effective played the various private Train companies off each other after staff culling which led to shortage of experienced Train drivers, Short term profit long term cost... Oh dear! However, with 24 hour shift pattern, increase chance of serious health issues stacking up in later life....One driver pulling several hundred people and their very expensive tickets. Good for them.

Still it's only a good wage now in some parts of the country, others it will leave a family struggling struggling... Think we would have to look internationally to see if this wage holds its own worldwide..

And £200 million payed out to shareholders, down from some years ago but back on the upward trend, are you a shareholder?

I have an ISA tracker fund, so quite possibly. It's for my retirement. Sorry if that's bad like.

 

[Hickson9]

That is utter rubbish. The RMT does not, has not and could not restrict the number of drivers available to a TOC, and the regulations it "imposes" (or to be much more correct, "follows") are usually long established railway regulations that often have safety at their heart which the government and the firms are actively trying to get rid of - like the strikes against driver-only operation on Southern a while back, which were emphatically in the interests of the paying passenger (unless you think having a train with more than a thousand people on it with one member of staff aboard between stations is a good idea) as well as the employee (as the government weren't going to give them any more legal protection for the added responsibility they were told to accept).

Erm... it is just basic trade union economic theory.

RMT was just the example.

And Driver Only Operation is already being safely operated on the rail network and passengers are fine...

Those strikes were about the Guards losing a "safety critical" function (as that function is transferred to drivers) and therefore their jobs being more vulnerable in future.

Note - guards weren't going to lose jobs in the short term as they would retain the rest of their function where where interact with passengers. So stating 1 member of staff per train is simply false. Of course that could change in the future, as all things change.

This is a good example of the unions imposing a regulation (not literally as in they are the regulator but doing their best to retain something that is restrictive in the interests of their members).

 

[NilSatisOptimum]

I have an ISA tracker fund, so quite possibly. It's for my retirement. Sorry if that's bad like.

Another £200 million not being invested in the network...

 

[Hickson9]

The Union was very effective played the various private Train companies off each other after staff culling which led to shortage of experienced Train drivers, Short term profit long term cost... Oh dear! However, with 24 hour shift pattern, increase chance of serious health issues stacking up in later life....One driver pulling several hundred people and their very expensive tickets. Good for them.

Still it's only a good wage now in some parts of the country, others it will leave a family struggling struggling... Think we would have to look internationally to see if this wage holds its own worldwide..

And £200 million payed out to shareholders, down from some years ago but back on the upward trend, are you a shareholder?

Bingo. The RMT found a way to make the job of train driving more scarce and therefore more valuable - for the short term gain.

And that is what a trade union does, acts in the interest of its members.

The line that it is for paying passengers or the general public is simply P.R. so we all put up with the disruption.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Another £200 million not being invested in the network...

Not sure that's how these things work.

 

[tsubaki]

The DLR has operated with that number of staff for years, and we're in a bizarre situation where tube drivers are paid a fortune to watch the train drive itself on several lines, just so they can be the hero in the extremely unlikely event of the train blowing up. I mean the unions have done a cracking job in squeezing the pip for their members, but lets not pretend that was done in anything but the self interest of them and their members.

The DLR is a relatively simple light rail system on which there is no other traffic, it also doesn't hold that many people per train. Comparing it to services (as on Southern) which will frequently have more than a thousand people on them and which will be running on some of the busiest lines in the entire world is daft. What do you expect the driver to do if someone pulls the emergency alarm and they are the only member of staff on the train? How does someone elderly or disabled get on a train at an unstaffed station?

With regards to the RMT, they have done very well for most of their members but they've been assisted considerably by the management of the various firms making them (drivers) into such a valuable commodity.

Erm... it is just basic trade union economic theory.

RMT was just the example.

And Driver Only Operation is already being safely operated on the rail network and passengers are fine...

Those strikes were about the Guards losing a "safety critical" function (as that function is transferred to drivers) and therefore their jobs being more vulnerable in future.

Note - guards weren't going to lose jobs in the short term as they would retain the rest of their function where where interact with passengers. So stating 1 member of staff per train is simply false. Of course that could change in the future, as all things change.

This is a good example of the unions imposing a regulation (not literally as in they are the regulator but doing their best to retain something that is restrictive in the interests of their members).

It isn't, though. The RMT does not recruit or train the drivers; that is down to the TOCs. The fact that there are not enough of them is down to the TOCs not recruiting enough - that its also led to the ones they do have having higher wages / better conditions as a result is down to them, not the RMT.

Nor is DOO an "example of the unions imposing a regulation" - the regulation exists already, it was the firms (encouraged by the government) who have been actively trying to get rid of it. With regards to "the guards werent going to lose jobs in the short term" - lol.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

The DLR is a relatively simple light rail system on which there is no other traffic, it also doesn't hold that many people per train. Comparing it to services (as on Southern) which will frequently have more than a thousand people on them and which will be running on some of the busiest lines in the entire world is daft. What do you expect the driver to do if someone pulls the emergency alarm and they are the only member of staff on the train? How does someone elderly or disabled get on a train at an unstaffed station?

With regards to the RMT, they have done very well for most of their members but they've been assisted considerably by the management of the various firms making them (drivers) into such a valuable commodity.

Show me the figures? A number of lines operate driver only services, so show the evidence that they are less safe than those with a guard. That's the best course of action as that's much harder to dispute. After all, I believe around 30% of the network operates without a guard so there should be plenty of evidence out there, especially as it was first introduced in 1982. Similarly, driver only trains are common in Ireland, Germany, Denmark, Australia, New Zealand, the US and Canada so there must presumably be safety issues all over the place? Yet that hasn't happened, and indeed the rail regulator said that it's a perfectly safe method of operating.

Such strikes are a political move to grab more money for members. Nothing more.

 

[tsubaki]

Show me the figures? A number of lines operate driver only services, so show the evidence that they are less safe than those with a guard. That's the best course of action as that's much harder to dispute. After all, I believe around 30% of the network operates without a guard so there should be plenty of evidence out there, especially as it was first introduced in 1982. Similarly, driver only trains are common in Ireland, Germany, Denmark, Australia, New Zealand, the US and Canada so there must presumably be safety issues all over the place? Yet that hasn't happened, and indeed the rail regulator said that it's a perfectly safe method of operating.

Such strikes are a political move to grab more money for members. Nothing more.

Oh great, a spurious insistence on figures to "prove" that DOO trains are less safe than those with a guard.

In what way does that answer the question of what is a driver going to do if they are the only member of staff on a train with hundreds of people on it when the emergency alarm is activated? Is someone in a wheelchair going to board a train at an unstaffed station using a ramp of the figures supporting driver only operation? Saying that it works on the tube (where there are lots of staff on platforms) or that it "works" on the quietest 30% of the network (though "works" here means "we haven't had any major accidents") so therefore it will work in situations that are completely different to that is just wrong.

What sticks in my throat the most with your (and Hickson9's) argument though is this insistence that a dispute called - and fought (and won) - by the RMT in order to protect the jobs of a second person responsible for safety on the train was in fact about the drivers getting more money. Did you think that Southern were going to pass on the "savings" they'd make by getting rid of guards onto the customers?

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Oh great, a spurious insistence on figures to "prove" that DOO trains are less safe than those with a guard.

In what way does that answer the question of what is a driver going to do if they are the only member of staff on a train with hundreds of people on it when the emergency alarm is activated? Is someone in a wheelchair going to board a train at an unstaffed station using a ramp of the figures supporting driver only operation? Saying that it works on the tube (where there are lots of staff on platforms) or that it "works" on the quietest 30% of the network (though "works" here means "we haven't had any major accidents") so therefore it will work in situations that are completely different to that is just wrong.

What sticks in my throat the most with your (and Hickson9's) argument though is this insistence that a dispute called - and fought (and won) - by the RMT in order to protect the jobs of a second person responsible for safety on the train was in fact about the drivers getting more money. Did you think that Southern were going to pass on the "savings" they'd make by getting rid of guards onto the customers?

The regulator has assessed the network over the near 40 years of DOO trains being in operation and found no safety differences, just as there has been no safety differences in any of the countries where DOO is in operation, so yes, it is spurious when the unions try and brand their numerous strikes as being about the safety of passengers, because there claims lack any evidence at all. Regarding your last comment, that's about as helpful as me suggesting that any 'savings' made by a nationalised rail network would instantly go to staff for whom their trade union has Corbyn in their pocket. It perhaps wouldn't be very helpful either though, would it?

 

[tsubaki]

The regulator has assessed the network over the near 40 years of DOO trains being in operation and found no safety differences, just as there has been no safety differences in any of the countries where DOO is in operation, so yes, it is spurious when the unions try and brand their numerous strikes as being about the safety of passengers, because there claims lack any evidence at all. Regarding your last comment, that's about as helpful as me suggesting that any 'savings' made by a nationalised rail network would instantly go to staff for whom their trade union has Corbyn in their pocket. It perhaps wouldn't be very helpful either though, would it?

Bruce - DOO works in some contexts, where there is sufficient staff to prevent problems (the Tube), on quiet lines or on very simple systems. It is a lot less likely to work, and would be much more dangerous, on high capacity routes like many of the ones Southern run - because if something goes wrong, the driver cannot both look after their train and deal with the emergency. This is why high speed trains are never DOO - here, on the continent or anywhere else (as far as I am aware).

 

[NilSatisOptimum]

Iain Duncan Smith is at it again with his Social Justice, not content with Universal Credit and various other benefit cuts, the Tories favourite think tank since Cameron came to power, are now considering raising retirement to 75...

Raise state pension age to 75 says think tank 'work is life-enhancing'

THE state pension age should go up to 75, according to a think tank run by the man behind Boris Johnson’s prime ministerial campaign. The Centre for Social Justice (CSJ) wants the pension age to reach 70 by 2028 and 75 by 2035.

www.express.co.uk

Raising pension age to 75 would create £182bn boost for British economy, report claims

Raising the pension age to 75 would boost the economy by £182 billion, a new report has claimed.

www.telegraph.co.uk

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Iain Duncan Smith is at it again with his Social Justice, not content with Universal Credit and various other benefit cuts, the Tories favourite think tank since Cameron came to power, are now considering raising retirement to 75...

Raise state pension age to 75 says think tank 'work is life-enhancing'

THE state pension age should go up to 75, according to a think tank run by the man behind Boris Johnson’s prime ministerial campaign. The Centre for Social Justice (CSJ) wants the pension age to reach 70 by 2028 and 75 by 2035.

www.express.co.uk

Raising pension age to 75 would create £182bn boost for British economy, report claims

Raising the pension age to 75 would boost the economy by £182 billion, a new report has claimed.

www.telegraph.co.uk

Do you not think retirement should rise in line with life expectancy?