Potential industrial action over IEP introduction

[whole diary]

[ChrisB]

Smartly back on topic....

Hmmm.....This makes for interesting (but not unexpected) reading.....

I won't quote it here until a Mod tells me I can - or edits my post, which in this case, I'm happy for that to happen. You'll understand I think when you read what appears to be a RMT^▸ (National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers) member's blog which contains a scanned copy of a FGW^▸ (First Great Western) letter to staff.

[JayMac]

From the BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page):

Dispute over jobs and catering on new Hitachi high-speed trains

The RMT^▸ (National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers) union has declared a dispute over First Great Western's plans to axe guards and buffet cars on the new Hitachi Inter City Express trains.

The union said it was taking action to retain a guard on every train, "not a diluted customer service role" and full buffet car facilities.

First Great Western denied claims that jobs would be lost.

The train company said having drivers operating the doors using in-cab CCTV^▸ (Closed Circuit Tele Vision) was safer and quicker.

The first Hitachi trains will run on the Great Western main line from 2017 and the East Coast main line from 2018.

The new trains are being introduced under the Intercity Express Programme (IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.)) on routes between London Paddington and Oxford, Bristol and South Wales.

RMT General Secretary Mick Cash said: "They [First Great Western] are pressing ahead with proposals that will allow for driver only operation with the sacking and reducing of the safety critical operational role of train guards/conductors."

The train firm said drivers would be in sole charge of doors on the new trains.

It said research showed in-cab CCTV allowed close monitoring of the platform by the driver and would cut journey times.

About 2,500 rail workers, including drivers, guards and station staff, will vote on whether to launch a campaign of action, the union said.

Buffet cars could also be replaced with just a trolley service under the plans.

The RMT said it was seeking an urgent meeting with the company.

[ChrisB]

No sacking whatsoever.

[JayMac]

The RMT^▸ (National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers)'s position in full:

http://www.rmt.org.uk/news/rmt-declares-dispute-and-prepares-to-ballot-on-fgw/

8 April 2015
RMT Press Office

RAIL UNION RMT confirmed today that it has declared a dispute and is preparing an industrial action ballot on Great Western services after First Group confirmed in a letter to the union that it is laying out the the ground to axe guards and catering services on the new Inter City Express trains being supplied by Hitachi.

The letter, which confirms everything that RMT has been warning of since the union first saw the plans for the new trains, makes it clear that FGW^▸ (First Great Western) are seeking to impose the following conditions for the operation of Super Express Trains (SETs^▸ (Super Express Train (now IET))):

^    The Driver will be solely responsible for the operation of the doors on SET trains.
^    Although not the normal method of operation, SET services could be operated with the Driver as the only member of staff on board when a Train Manager is not immediately available.

In respect of catering facilities the correspondence confirms that whilst a full kitchen will be provided on all SET trains the intention is to introduce an at seat trolley service in standard class ^ the ^Upstairs/Downstairs^ service that the union has been warning of from the outset.

The response from the company wholly fails to address in any way the assurances required by the union and RMT has now made it clear that it will take all necessary measures to defend the interests of its members from the implications of these proposals and fight tooth and nail for both safety and job security. 

RMT will now:

^    Write to FGW advising them that a dispute situation now exists between our respective organisations.
^    Seek an urgent meeting with the company regarding their proposals
^    Finalise the preparations of an industrial action ballot

RMT^s demands in respect of the introduction of the new Inter City trains remain the same:

^     To keep a safety competent guard on every train ^not a diluted customer service role
^     To keep full buffet car facilities and catering services
^     Maintaining station staffing levels including safety critical station dispatch staff
^     No job losses or dilution of current roles or creation of new job roles with inferior terms and conditions
^     To bring depot, turn-around and on-board cleaning in-house.
^     To maintain the job security of our members working in the current fleet engineering depots where TUPE^▸ (The Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006.) and the principles of job security apply

RMT General Secretary Mick Cash said;‎

^RMT has been campaigning for months to fight plans that could lead to the axing of buffet cars, on-board staff and maintenance workers on First Great Western when the new trains arrive, with a series of events in response to the  moves which the union has blasted as ^ushering in an ^Upstairs-Downstairs^ service on Inter-City services while British passengers pay the highest fares in Europe.^ Over 50 MP^▸ (Member of Parliament)^s have now signed the Early Day Motion backing RMT^s position.
 
^ The company have now made it clear that they are ignoring RMT and are pressing ahead with proposals that will allow for driver only operation and the removal of buffet cars and their replacement by a trolley service only catering facility along with the sacking and reducing of the safety critical operational role of train guards /conductors. That places us straight into a dispute and triggers the preparations for an industrial action ballot.^
 
^First Group are working hand in glove with this Government of the rich, for the rich and by the rich in  introducing an ^Upstairs-Downstairs^ service on Britain^s long haul rail services which would condemn the vast majority to pay through the nose to travel in rammed-out carriages where the catering trolley is jammed at one end while the elite glide through the country like extras from Downton Abbey . First were recently handed a cash-laden, taxpayer-sponsored contract extension on FGW without any competition and clearly see that as a green light to smash up jobs, safety and working conditions as they milk the deal for all its worth.
 
^RMT is throwing it^s full resources and industrial and political clout behind the fight to stop this attack on jobs, services and safety arising from the introduction of the Inter-City fleet. The union remains available for talks.^
 
ENDS

[ellendune]

Are there 50 MP^▸ (Member of Parliament)'s to sign an early day motion? I thought Parliament had ben dissolved.  In which case there are no MP's. 

[Rhydgaled]

RMT^▸ (National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers)^s demands in respect of the introduction of the new Inter City trains remain the same:

^     To keep a safety competent guard on every train ^not a diluted customer service role
^     To keep full buffet car facilities and catering services
^     Maintaining station staffing levels including safety critical station dispatch staff
^     No job losses or dilution of current roles or creation of new job roles with inferior terms and conditions
^     To bring depot, turn-around and on-board cleaning in-house.
^     To maintain the job security of our members working in the current fleet engineering depots where TUPE^▸ (The Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006.) and the principles of job security apply

Of those demands, the only one not being met is retention of buffet cars isn't it? I suppose not having control of the doors could constitute "dilution of current roles" but isn't the 'Train Manager' post, which is being kept, still "a safety competent guard"? Shame they don't have "keep at least the same number of seats on every service" on their list of demands...

[didcotdean]

Are there 50 MP^▸ (Member of Parliament)'s to sign an early day motion? I thought Parliament had ben dissolved.  In which case there are no MP's. 

The EDM referred to has been around since 1 December and also covers the EC Main Line. There is a separate one specific to FGW^▸ (First Great Western), but the RMT^▸ (National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers) possibly doesn't refer to it as this one appears to have been promoted by TSSA^» (Transport Salaried Staffs' Association - about).

[broadgage]

I can not agree with the RMT^▸ (National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers) regarding door control. Given effective CCTV^▸ (Closed Circuit Tele Vision), viewable by the driver, I consider it preferable for the driver to operate the doors. Apart from anything else, driver operation of the doors should be slightly quicker.
I see no need for a guard or train manager on ECS^▸ (Empty Coaching Stock) moves.

On passenger services I agree that a guard/train manager is required in case of accident, emergency or breakdown. Since such events should be rare, I see no reason why they cant perform other duties such as ticket checks as well.

As regards the removal of buffets, I agree entirely with the RMT, though my concern is from the customers point of view, rather than protecting members jobs, which is of course the unions concern.
For some years I have expressed an opinion, and more recently I have stated as a fact that "the new trains wont have buffets"
Apologists for the new shorter trains have stated (some years ago) that they will have buffets, more recently that they "will have buffets but only for first class" More recently still as internal layout drawings emerged, without buffets, the story changed to "the internal fit out is flexible, if the TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company) want a buffet, it can be fitted"
Now the trains are being built, without buffets, well what a surprise !
Apologists for the new trains can no longer claim that that they will/might/could have buffets and are therefore saying instead that this is fine because no wants buffets anymore and prefers a trolley.

I presume that FGW^▸ (First Great Western) and the department for transport will blame each other.

[ellendune]

I see no need for a guard or train manager on ECS^▸ (Empty Coaching Stock) moves.

I thought they did not need one as I have seen the crew joining the 06:40 Swindon to Cheltenham at Swindon when the ECS has come in from St Phillips Marsh.

[Tim]

I support the RMT^▸ (National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers) re buffet cars.  The removal surprises me because FGW^▸ (First Great Western) has proven itself to be responsive to customer feedback on this matter previously.  Didn't they install the mini-buffets as a result of passenger complaints?

[SandTEngineer]

There are lots of daily HST^▸ (High Speed Train) DOO^▸ (Driver-Only Operation (that is, trains which operate without carrying a guard)) empty stock moves all over the FGW^▸ (First Great Western) network. Most of the depot to start station and vice-versa moves are like that and inter-depot movements as well.

[4064ReadingAbbey]

I have a feeling of d^ja-vu...

The initial testing and introduction of the High Speed Train (then the High Speed Diesel Train) was held up for about a year in the 1970s because ASLEF^» (Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen - about) would not agree to single manning and insisted that a fireman second man was carried in trains travelling at more than 100mph. The prototype HST^▸ (High Speed Train) was completed in June 1972 and the dispute started in July, just after the Advanced Passenger Train - Experimental's (APT^▸ (Advanced Passenger Train)-E) first run, as this also had only one seat at the front. This dispute dragged on for more than a year and was finally resolved in September 1973 when test running of the HST could finally start.

The HST's cab, and that of the later models of the APT, was redesigned to incorporate a second seat with a forward view.

Over 40 years later similar arguments are still being brought forward, this time about an extension of Driver Only Operation - a system of operation which has been used for years and has not been proven to be any less safe than operation with guard.

Plus ^a change, plus ^a reste la m^me chose...

[Network SouthEast]

As a driver (and in my career I've worked both DOO^▸ (Driver-Only Operation (that is, trains which operate without carrying a guard)) and non DOO services), I'm afraid it is a total myth that drivers controlling door operation is in any way quicker than a guard. It certainly isn't any safer.

Look at London Overground. They recently went from conventionally crewed trains to DOO.

Did it improve PPM^‡(resolve)? No.
Has time been saved from the timetable?  No.

So why doesn't driver control of doors save any time?

Say you are controlling the doors on a train by CCTV^▸ (Closed Circuit Tele Vision). You need the camereas to have good lighting, be clean and no sun glares (also the monitor). You have to check 5, 9 or 10 small squares of image at once, not as easy as just looking along a platform.

What about platform mirrors? No room for error when stopping. They are exposed to the elements. They get vandalised. They're not even safe from Network Rail putting fences in the way (as happened at two stations). They offer a poor view the further away from the cab.

What about platform CCTV? The worst of both of the above plus add monitors that are hard to read from an angle.

As a driver with the above challenges,  you can't rush the doors.

In fact, you can't rush releasing the doors because you need to make sure the train is fully platformed and the doors on the correct side are to be released. No time saved there by the driver doing the doors.

So I strongly disagree with anyone that argues drivers controlling door operation will some how speed it up.

On DOO routes you then have "irregular door releases" where due to the repetitive nature of driving you get a train stop and the driver releases the doors even though the train isn't at a station. Sure these events are rare, but it is a risk that doesn't exist when the guard does the doors.

There's also the customer service side of things. As a driver doing the doors, you're doing so from the driving cab. You have a narrow field of vision. You might not be able to see who might need help on the platform. Any time you have to leave the cab you are supposed to tell the signaller first, which slows things down. People get left behind or over carried.

So please excuse me if I am less than thrilled at the thought of guards losing control of train door operation.

[bobm]

Thank you for a very informative post - I have never thought of some of those issues, despite travelling on many DOO^▸ (Driver-Only Operation (that is, trains which operate without carrying a guard)) trains over time. 

Then there is also the question of making PA^▸ (Public Address) announcements - are you supposed to do them while on the move?

[JayMac]

Guards releasing doors can be unsafe as well. As I witnessed this evening. Won't say where to protect the guilty, but what I saw could have seen passengers stepping off halfway down a ramp.

I happened to be in the right place to shout a warning.