Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
> On 01/12/2023 09:40, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <ukc833$1qg06$1@dont-email.me>, at 09:13:06 on Fri, 1 Dec
>> 2023, Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> remarked:
>>> On 01/12/2023 07:16, Roland Perry wrote:
>>
>>>> Despite recent rumours to the contrary here, the RMT has just settled
>>>> their ongoing dispute.
>>
>>>>  ASLEF continue in their campaign to convince people to explore other
>>>> transport options than rail.
>>>>
>>> Do you have a reference to assert your claims?
>>
>> Which claims? Today's developments are all over the main stream media.
>
> I've read two reports. Neither of them say anything even close to
> convincing people to explore other transport options than rail. Where
> did you read this.
>
> My experience is that its the long term blockades which has that effect.
> Severn Tunnel Junction to Cheltenham has been closed for the past two
> school summer holidays and Bristol Temple Meads railway station the
> summer before that. One can usually work ones way around the odd strike
> but not a six week blockade.
>

Ian Walmsley makes an interesting comment in hs recent article, on the
Nottingham trams. The NET operator is penalised for any stoppage, for any
cause, even if the fault wasn't theirs. So if the trams are stopped because
a raised tipper truck pulls down the knitting, the NET operator still gets
penalised till the line reopens. So there's a lot of pressure to maximise
availability. He speculates that a similar scheme affecting NR executive
bonuses might greatly reduce line closures.

Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
> Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>> On 01/12/2023 09:40, Roland Perry wrote:
>>> In message <ukc833$1qg06$1@dont-email.me>, at 09:13:06 on Fri, 1 Dec
>>> 2023, Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> remarked:
>>>> On 01/12/2023 07:16, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Despite recent rumours to the contrary here, the RMT has just settled
>>>>> their ongoing dispute.
>>>
>>>>>  ASLEF continue in their campaign to convince people to explore other
>>>>> transport options than rail.
>>>>>
>>>> Do you have a reference to assert your claims?
>>>
>>> Which claims? Today's developments are all over the main stream media.
>>
>> I've read two reports. Neither of them say anything even close to
>> convincing people to explore other transport options than rail. Where
>> did you read this.
>>
>> My experience is that its the long term blockades which has that effect.
>> Severn Tunnel Junction to Cheltenham has been closed for the past two
>> school summer holidays and Bristol Temple Meads railway station the
>> summer before that. One can usually work ones way around the odd strike
>> but not a six week blockade.
>>
>
> Ian Walmsley makes an interesting comment in hs recent article, on the
> Nottingham trams. The NET operator is penalised for any stoppage, for any
> cause, even if the fault wasn't theirs. So if the trams are stopped because
> a raised tipper truck pulls down the knitting, the NET operator still gets
> penalised till the line reopens. So there's a lot of pressure to maximise
> availability. He speculates that a similar scheme affecting NR executive
> bonuses might greatly reduce line closures.
>
>
Not directly connected to planned engineering work, but rail delays in
general. I feel the delay repay schemes are a bit of a double edged sword.
I think it can lead to a culture of the delay doesn’t matter because the
passenger can claim compensation, and funding that compensation is rarely
affecting those who might have the ability to reduce the root causes.

On 02/12/2023 09:27, Tweed wrote:
> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>>> On 01/12/2023 09:40, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>> In message <ukc833$1qg06$1@dont-email.me>, at 09:13:06 on Fri, 1 Dec
>>>> 2023, Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> remarked:
>>>>> On 01/12/2023 07:16, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Despite recent rumours to the contrary here, the RMT has just settled
>>>>>> their ongoing dispute.
>>>>
>>>>>>  ASLEF continue in their campaign to convince people to explore other
>>>>>> transport options than rail.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Do you have a reference to assert your claims?
>>>>
>>>> Which claims? Today's developments are all over the main stream media.
>>>
>>> I've read two reports. Neither of them say anything even close to
>>> convincing people to explore other transport options than rail. Where
>>> did you read this.
>>>
>>> My experience is that its the long term blockades which has that effect.
>>> Severn Tunnel Junction to Cheltenham has been closed for the past two
>>> school summer holidays and Bristol Temple Meads railway station the
>>> summer before that. One can usually work ones way around the odd strike
>>> but not a six week blockade.
>>>
>>
>> Ian Walmsley makes an interesting comment in hs recent article, on the
>> Nottingham trams. The NET operator is penalised for any stoppage, for any
>> cause, even if the fault wasn't theirs. So if the trams are stopped because
>> a raised tipper truck pulls down the knitting, the NET operator still gets
>> penalised till the line reopens. So there's a lot of pressure to maximise
>> availability. He speculates that a similar scheme affecting NR executive
>> bonuses might greatly reduce line closures.
>>
>>
> Not directly connected to planned engineering work, but rail delays in
> general. I feel the delay repay schemes are a bit of a double edged sword.
> I think it can lead to a culture of the delay doesn’t matter because the
> passenger can claim compensation, and funding that compensation is rarely
> affecting those who might have the ability to reduce the root causes.

I've got three delay replay compensation if process and they are all due
to operator/HMG failings.

One of them is a GA failing and the other two relate to the present gWr
IET shortage.

In message <uket96$2aaqn$1@dont-email.me>, at 09:27:02 on Sat, 2 Dec
2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>>> On 01/12/2023 09:40, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>> In message <ukc833$1qg06$1@dont-email.me>, at 09:13:06 on Fri, 1 Dec
>>>> 2023, Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> remarked:
>>>>> On 01/12/2023 07:16, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Despite recent rumours to the contrary here, the RMT has just settled
>>>>>> their ongoing dispute.
>>>>
>>>>>>  ASLEF continue in their campaign to convince people to explore other
>>>>>> transport options than rail.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Do you have a reference to assert your claims?
>>>>
>>>> Which claims? Today's developments are all over the main stream media.
>>>
>>> I've read two reports. Neither of them say anything even close to
>>> convincing people to explore other transport options than rail. Where
>>> did you read this.
>>>
>>> My experience is that its the long term blockades which has that effect.
>>> Severn Tunnel Junction to Cheltenham has been closed for the past two
>>> school summer holidays and Bristol Temple Meads railway station the
>>> summer before that. One can usually work ones way around the odd strike
>>> but not a six week blockade.
>>
>> Ian Walmsley makes an interesting comment in hs recent article, on the
>> Nottingham trams. The NET operator is penalised for any stoppage, for any
>> cause, even if the fault wasn't theirs. So if the trams are stopped because
>> a raised tipper truck pulls down the knitting, the NET operator still gets
>> penalised till the line reopens. So there's a lot of pressure to maximise
>> availability. He speculates that a similar scheme affecting NR executive
>> bonuses might greatly reduce line closures.
>>
>Not directly connected to planned engineering work, but rail delays in
>general. I feel the delay repay schemes are a bit of a double edged sword.
>I think it can lead to a culture of the delay doesn’t matter because the
>passenger can claim compensation, and funding that compensation is rarely
>affecting those who might have the ability to reduce the root causes.

I agree. The vibe from the TOCs is very much "we don't care the train is
late, because you can spend half an hour filling forms to get £1.50
compensation". I've actually given up, unless the delay is more than an
hour (or it was a particularly long trip); which is probably what they
were hoping most people would do.

Especially as my time is worth more than £1.50 per half an hour, and if
I need to catch a taxi instead to complete the journey in a timely
fashion, that's a minimum of £10. So claiming £1.50 is just throwing
good money after bad.
--
Roland Perry

In message <2ooaN.12$XUo2.8@fx14.ams1>, at 17:06:06 on Fri, 1 Dec 2023,
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>> In message <o0njmitumrh303d5aqk14r77cn2nnfm8gi@4ax.com>, at 13:15:19 on
>> Fri, 1 Dec 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>> On Fri, 1 Dec 2023 12:58:51 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In message <IPhaN.87461$OAC8.26087@fx09.ams1>, at 09:37:44 on Fri, 1 Dec
>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Despite recent rumours to the contrary here, the RMT has just settled
>>>>>> their ongoing dispute.
>>>>>
>>>>> There were no such rumours here.
>>>>
>>>> Don't be ridiculous, in the last couple of weeks you posted a sarcastic
>>>> comment to the effect I'd not noticed the RMT dispute was settled in the
>>>> Spring.
>>>
>>> As, indeed it was.
>>
>> Not according to the press this week.
>
>Not the proper press, which you can't access.

What on earth are you talking about. Or is this yet another example of
your definition of "proper press" being something the reader has a
subscription to? When that's no guarantee of better journalism, anyway.

>> Or indeed the travelling public
>> who have endured cancelled trains all Summer due to the ongoing dispute.
>
>Different dispute, with different employers.

But that's not what you implied the other day.

>>>> Nice try, but no cigar!
>>>
>>> Huh? Just because you're confused by the fragmented rail industry
>>> doesn't mean that the rest of us are.
>>
>> You seem to be the one most confused.
>
>Oh dear, Roland. I realise you have more important things to worry about
>than the rail industry, so why do you keep trying to pick silly fights you
>can't win?

The only person picking fights here is you.
--
Roland Perry

In message <3ooaN.13$XUo2.1@fx14.ams1>, at 17:06:07 on Fri, 1 Dec 2023,
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>> In message <ukcqk6$1t8ro$1@dont-email.me>, at 14:29:26 on Fri, 1 Dec
>> 2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <IPhaN.87461$OAC8.26087@fx09.ams1>, at 09:37:44 on Fri, 1 Dec
>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Despite recent rumours to the contrary here, the RMT has just settled
>>>>>> their ongoing dispute.
>>>>>
>>>>> There were no such rumours here.
>>>>
>>>> Don't be ridiculous, in the last couple of weeks you posted a sarcastic
>>>> comment to the effect I'd not noticed the RMT dispute was settled in the
>>>> Spring.
>>>>
>>>> Nice try, but no cigar!
>>>
>>> It was pointed out that the RMT dispute with Network Rail was settled in
>>> the spring.
>>
>> That "small print" was omitted.
>
>No it wasn't. You just didn't understand the difference. If you wish to
>provide a bumptious commentary on the rail industry without looking very
>silly, you do need to make some effort to understand it.

Yet more lies.

>> Indeed our laid-back friend has
>> confirmed this afternoon that his opinion is nothing new has just been
>> agreed.
>>
>>> There has been an ongoing (until yesterday) RMT dispute with
>>> most of the TOCs.
>>
>> Yes, most of us understand that. There's just one refusenik.
>
>Yes, you.
>
>You seem not to know the difference between the RDG and NR.

It's preposterous to suggest any people here don't know that difference.

>The RMT had different disputes with both and separate series of
>strikes. The NR dispute was settled months ago, and the RDG one this
>week. And, no, that won't stop the drivers' strikes as very few of them
>are RMT members.

What surprises me is how much disruption the RMT-who-work-for-TOCs
caused, when I agree so few are train drivers (outside TfL anyway).

You don't need to cancel a train just because an RMT person who might
have cleaned the toilet on board is on strike. And yes, I've seen
increasing numbers of trains with toilets locked out etc, recently.
--
Roland Perry

On 01/12/2023 13:13, Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
> Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>> On 01/12/2023 07:16, Roland Perry wrote:
>>> Despite recent rumours to the contrary here, the RMT has just settled
>>> their ongoing dispute.
>>>
>>> ASLEF continue in their campaign to convince people to explore other
>>> transport options than rail.
>>>
>> Do you have a reference to assert your claims?
>>
>
> The RMT dispute is not 'settled' as such; the current industrial action is
> called off as a pay deal for *2022* has been agreed; 2023's pay deal
> negotiations and potential T&C changes begin in early 2024 at TOC level.
>
> ASLEF haven't been offered the same agreement as the RMT has; if that were
> offered I feel confident that the forthcoming action would be postponed
> while it was put to a vote [1].
>
> [1] ASLEF's rules (agreed and voted on by the members) state that a pay
> deal cannot be put to the membership if the recommendation from the
> Executive Committee is that members should reject it; that's why none of
> the previous offers have been put to ballot.
>
>
> Anna Noyd-Dryver
>

I wonder what would happen if DfT/TOCs put more pressure on ASLEF - e.g.
saying that for each future strike day, drivers' annual pay will be
reduced by, say £1000 per year? (To help compensate for lost revenue. Of
course that might mean some changes to the law, but there are probably
enough Tories to force such a change through Parliament.)

Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
> In message <3ooaN.13$XUo2.1@fx14.ams1>, at 17:06:07 on Fri, 1 Dec 2023,
> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <ukcqk6$1t8ro$1@dont-email.me>, at 14:29:26 on Fri, 1 Dec
>>> 2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <IPhaN.87461$OAC8.26087@fx09.ams1>, at 09:37:44 on Fri, 1 Dec
>>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Despite recent rumours to the contrary here, the RMT has just settled
>>>>>>> their ongoing dispute.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There were no such rumours here.
>>>>>
>>>>> Don't be ridiculous, in the last couple of weeks you posted a sarcastic
>>>>> comment to the effect I'd not noticed the RMT dispute was settled in the
>>>>> Spring.
>>>>>
>>>>> Nice try, but no cigar!
>>>>
>>>> It was pointed out that the RMT dispute with Network Rail was settled in
>>>> the spring.
>>>
>>> That "small print" was omitted.
>>
>> No it wasn't. You just didn't understand the difference. If you wish to
>> provide a bumptious commentary on the rail industry without looking very
>> silly, you do need to make some effort to understand it.
>
> Yet more lies.
>
>>> Indeed our laid-back friend has
>>> confirmed this afternoon that his opinion is nothing new has just been
>>> agreed.
>>>
>>>> There has been an ongoing (until yesterday) RMT dispute with
>>>> most of the TOCs.
>>>
>>> Yes, most of us understand that. There's just one refusenik.
>>
>> Yes, you.
>>
>> You seem not to know the difference between the RDG and NR.
>
> It's preposterous to suggest any people here don't know that difference.
>
>> The RMT had different disputes with both and separate series of
>> strikes. The NR dispute was settled months ago, and the RDG one this
>> week. And, no, that won't stop the drivers' strikes as very few of them
>> are RMT members.
>
> What surprises me is how much disruption the RMT-who-work-for-TOCs
> caused, when I agree so few are train drivers (outside TfL anyway).
>
> You don't need to cancel a train just because an RMT person who might
> have cleaned the toilet on board is on strike. And yes, I've seen
> increasing numbers of trains with toilets locked out etc, recently.

Lots of services depend on a guard and platform dispatch staff.

On 02/12/2023 14:54, Bevan Price wrote:
> On 01/12/2023 13:13, Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
>> Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>>> On 01/12/2023 07:16, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>> Despite recent rumours to the contrary here, the RMT has just settled
>>>> their ongoing dispute.
>>>>
>>>> ASLEF continue in their campaign to convince people to explore other
>>>> transport options than rail.
>>>>
>>> Do you have a reference to assert your claims?
>>>
>>
>> The RMT dispute is not 'settled' as such; the current industrial
>> action is
>> called off as a pay deal for *2022* has been agreed; 2023's pay deal
>> negotiations and potential T&C changes begin in early 2024 at TOC level.
>>
>> ASLEF haven't been offered the same agreement as the RMT has; if that
>> were
>> offered I feel confident that the forthcoming action would be postponed
>> while it was put to a vote [1].
>>
>> [1] ASLEF's rules (agreed and voted on by the members) state that a pay
>> deal cannot be put to the membership if the recommendation from the
>> Executive Committee is that members should reject it; that's why none of
>> the previous offers have been put to ballot.
>>
>>
>> Anna Noyd-Dryver
>>
>
> I wonder what would happen if DfT/TOCs put more pressure on ASLEF - e.g.
> saying that for each future strike day, drivers' annual pay will be
> reduced by, say £1000 per year? (To help compensate for lost revenue. Of
> course that might mean some changes to the law, but there are probably
> enough Tories to force such a change through Parliament.)
>
>
>
>

That would get you straight into various courts for a long time. This
government hasn't got enough time left for any new and contentious
legislation.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 02/12/2023 15:11, Tweed wrote:
> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>> In message <3ooaN.13$XUo2.1@fx14.ams1>, at 17:06:07 on Fri, 1 Dec 2023,
>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <ukcqk6$1t8ro$1@dont-email.me>, at 14:29:26 on Fri, 1 Dec
>>>> 2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> In message <IPhaN.87461$OAC8.26087@fx09.ams1>, at 09:37:44 on Fri, 1 Dec
>>>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Despite recent rumours to the contrary here, the RMT has just settled
>>>>>>>> their ongoing dispute.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There were no such rumours here.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Don't be ridiculous, in the last couple of weeks you posted a sarcastic
>>>>>> comment to the effect I'd not noticed the RMT dispute was settled in the
>>>>>> Spring.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Nice try, but no cigar!
>>>>>
>>>>> It was pointed out that the RMT dispute with Network Rail was settled in
>>>>> the spring.
>>>>
>>>> That "small print" was omitted.
>>>
>>> No it wasn't. You just didn't understand the difference. If you wish to
>>> provide a bumptious commentary on the rail industry without looking very
>>> silly, you do need to make some effort to understand it.
>>
>> Yet more lies.
>>
>>>> Indeed our laid-back friend has
>>>> confirmed this afternoon that his opinion is nothing new has just been
>>>> agreed.
>>>>
>>>>> There has been an ongoing (until yesterday) RMT dispute with
>>>>> most of the TOCs.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, most of us understand that. There's just one refusenik.
>>>
>>> Yes, you.
>>>
>>> You seem not to know the difference between the RDG and NR.
>>
>> It's preposterous to suggest any people here don't know that difference.
>>
>>> The RMT had different disputes with both and separate series of
>>> strikes. The NR dispute was settled months ago, and the RDG one this
>>> week. And, no, that won't stop the drivers' strikes as very few of them
>>> are RMT members.
>>
>> What surprises me is how much disruption the RMT-who-work-for-TOCs
>> caused, when I agree so few are train drivers (outside TfL anyway).
>>
>> You don't need to cancel a train just because an RMT person who might
>> have cleaned the toilet on board is on strike. And yes, I've seen
>> increasing numbers of trains with toilets locked out etc, recently.
>
> Lots of services depend on a guard and platform dispatch staff.
>

And they all depend on signal staff.
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On 02/12/2023 15:11, Tweed wrote:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <3ooaN.13$XUo2.1@fx14.ams1>, at 17:06:07 on Fri, 1 Dec 2023,
>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <ukcqk6$1t8ro$1@dont-email.me>, at 14:29:26 on Fri, 1 Dec
>>>>> 2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <IPhaN.87461$OAC8.26087@fx09.ams1>, at 09:37:44 on Fri, 1 Dec
>>>>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Despite recent rumours to the contrary here, the RMT has just settled
>>>>>>>>> their ongoing dispute.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There were no such rumours here.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Don't be ridiculous, in the last couple of weeks you posted a sarcastic
>>>>>>> comment to the effect I'd not noticed the RMT dispute was settled in the
>>>>>>> Spring.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Nice try, but no cigar!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It was pointed out that the RMT dispute with Network Rail was settled in
>>>>>> the spring.
>>>>>
>>>>> That "small print" was omitted.
>>>>
>>>> No it wasn't. You just didn't understand the difference. If you wish to
>>>> provide a bumptious commentary on the rail industry without looking very
>>>> silly, you do need to make some effort to understand it.
>>>
>>> Yet more lies.
>>>
>>>>> Indeed our laid-back friend has
>>>>> confirmed this afternoon that his opinion is nothing new has just been
>>>>> agreed.
>>>>>
>>>>>> There has been an ongoing (until yesterday) RMT dispute with
>>>>>> most of the TOCs.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, most of us understand that. There's just one refusenik.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, you.
>>>>
>>>> You seem not to know the difference between the RDG and NR.
>>>
>>> It's preposterous to suggest any people here don't know that difference.
>>>
>>>> The RMT had different disputes with both and separate series of
>>>> strikes. The NR dispute was settled months ago, and the RDG one this
>>>> week. And, no, that won't stop the drivers' strikes as very few of them
>>>> are RMT members.
>>>
>>> What surprises me is how much disruption the RMT-who-work-for-TOCs
>>> caused, when I agree so few are train drivers (outside TfL anyway).
>>>
>>> You don't need to cancel a train just because an RMT person who might
>>> have cleaned the toilet on board is on strike. And yes, I've seen
>>> increasing numbers of trains with toilets locked out etc, recently.
>>
>> Lots of services depend on a guard and platform dispatch staff.
>>
>
> And they all depend on signal staff.

But the signal staff settled long ago. But back to Roland’s point - the
RMT-who-work-for-TOCs are needed (see guards and dispatch staff amongst
many others), they aren’t employed just for the fun of it. §

In message <ukfhee$2dcna$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:11:10 on Sat, 2 Dec
2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:

>> What surprises me is how much disruption the RMT-who-work-for-TOCs
>> caused, when I agree so few are train drivers (outside TfL anyway).
>>
>> You don't need to cancel a train just because an RMT person who might
>> have cleaned the toilet on board is on strike. And yes, I've seen
>> increasing numbers of trains with toilets locked out etc, recently.
>
>Lots of services depend on a guard and platform dispatch staff.

Although there are also many DOO services.

Platform staff at Ely are Greater Anglia, with trains from GA, GN, XC
and EMR. I suppose if one day EMR guards are on strike, and another day
the GA platform staff are on strike, you'd get "double trouble".
--
Roland Perry

In message <ukfi7h$2dgni$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:24:33 on Sat, 2 Dec
2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 02/12/2023 15:11, Tweed wrote:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <3ooaN.13$XUo2.1@fx14.ams1>, at 17:06:07 on Fri, 1 Dec 2023,
>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> In message <ukcqk6$1t8ro$1@dont-email.me>, at 14:29:26 on Fri, 1 Dec
>>>>>> 2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>> In message <IPhaN.87461$OAC8.26087@fx09.ams1>, at 09:37:44 on
>>>>>>>>Fri, 1 Dec
>>>>>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Despite recent rumours to the contrary here, the RMT has just settled
>>>>>>>>>> their ongoing dispute.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> There were no such rumours here.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Don't be ridiculous, in the last couple of weeks you posted a
>>>>>>>>sarcastic comment to the effect I'd not noticed the RMT dispute
>>>>>>>>was settled in the Spring.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Nice try, but no cigar!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It was pointed out that the RMT dispute with Network Rail was settled in
>>>>>>> the spring.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That "small print" was omitted.
>>>>>
>>>>> No it wasn't. You just didn't understand the difference. If you wish to
>>>>> provide a bumptious commentary on the rail industry without looking very
>>>>> silly, you do need to make some effort to understand it.
>>>>
>>>> Yet more lies.
>>>>
>>>>>> Indeed our laid-back friend has
>>>>>> confirmed this afternoon that his opinion is nothing new has just been
>>>>>> agreed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There has been an ongoing (until yesterday) RMT dispute with
>>>>>>> most of the TOCs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, most of us understand that. There's just one refusenik.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, you.
>>>>>
>>>>> You seem not to know the difference between the RDG and NR.
>>>>
>>>> It's preposterous to suggest any people here don't know that difference.
>>>>
>>>>> The RMT had different disputes with both and separate series of
>>>>> strikes. The NR dispute was settled months ago, and the RDG one this
>>>>> week. And, no, that won't stop the drivers' strikes as very few of them
>>>>> are RMT members.
>>>>
>>>> What surprises me is how much disruption the RMT-who-work-for-TOCs
>>>> caused, when I agree so few are train drivers (outside TfL anyway).
>>>>
>>>> You don't need to cancel a train just because an RMT person who might
>>>> have cleaned the toilet on board is on strike. And yes, I've seen
>>>> increasing numbers of trains with toilets locked out etc, recently.
>>>
>>> Lots of services depend on a guard and platform dispatch staff.
>>>
>>
>> And they all depend on signal staff.
>
>But the signal staff settled long ago. But back to Roland’s point - the
>RMT-who-work-for-TOCs are needed (see guards and dispatch staff amongst
>many others), they aren’t employed just for the fun of it. §

The majority of stations round here are unmanned, so no dispatch staff
to go on strike. What I don't know is if the one station which *is*
manned is a poison pill for all the others.
--
Roland Perry

In message <ukfhlg$2da5q$3@dont-email.me>, at 15:14:56 on Sat, 2 Dec
2023, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>On 02/12/2023 15:11, Tweed wrote:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <3ooaN.13$XUo2.1@fx14.ams1>, at 17:06:07 on Fri, 1 Dec 2023,
>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <ukcqk6$1t8ro$1@dont-email.me>, at 14:29:26 on Fri, 1 Dec
>>>>> 2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <IPhaN.87461$OAC8.26087@fx09.ams1>, at 09:37:44 on Fri, 1 Dec
>>>>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Despite recent rumours to the contrary here, the RMT has just settled
>>>>>>>>> their ongoing dispute.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There were no such rumours here.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Don't be ridiculous, in the last couple of weeks you posted a sarcastic
>>>>>>> comment to the effect I'd not noticed the RMT dispute was settled in the
>>>>>>> Spring.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Nice try, but no cigar!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It was pointed out that the RMT dispute with Network Rail was settled in
>>>>>> the spring.
>>>>>
>>>>> That "small print" was omitted.
>>>>
>>>> No it wasn't. You just didn't understand the difference. If you wish to
>>>> provide a bumptious commentary on the rail industry without looking very
>>>> silly, you do need to make some effort to understand it.
>>>
>>> Yet more lies.
>>>
>>>>> Indeed our laid-back friend has
>>>>> confirmed this afternoon that his opinion is nothing new has just been
>>>>> agreed.
>>>>>
>>>>>> There has been an ongoing (until yesterday) RMT dispute with
>>>>>> most of the TOCs.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, most of us understand that. There's just one refusenik.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, you.
>>>>
>>>> You seem not to know the difference between the RDG and NR.
>>>
>>> It's preposterous to suggest any people here don't know that difference.
>>>
>>>> The RMT had different disputes with both and separate series of
>>>> strikes. The NR dispute was settled months ago, and the RDG one this
>>>> week. And, no, that won't stop the drivers' strikes as very few of them
>>>> are RMT members.
>>>
>>> What surprises me is how much disruption the RMT-who-work-for-TOCs
>>> caused, when I agree so few are train drivers (outside TfL anyway).
>>>
>>> You don't need to cancel a train just because an RMT person who might
>>> have cleaned the toilet on board is on strike. And yes, I've seen
>>> increasing numbers of trains with toilets locked out etc, recently.
>> Lots of services depend on a guard and platform dispatch staff.
>
>And they all depend on signal staff.

Do keep up! That's the dispute settled in the Spring, isn't it.
--
Roland Perry

On 02/12/2023 15:57, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <ukfhlg$2da5q$3@dont-email.me>, at 15:14:56 on Sat, 2 Dec
> 2023, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>> On 02/12/2023 15:11, Tweed wrote:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <3ooaN.13$XUo2.1@fx14.ams1>, at 17:06:07 on Fri, 1 Dec 2023,
>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> In message <ukcqk6$1t8ro$1@dont-email.me>, at 14:29:26 on Fri, 1 Dec
>>>>>> 2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>> In message <IPhaN.87461$OAC8.26087@fx09.ams1>, at 09:37:44 on
>>>>>>>> Fri, 1 Dec
>>>>>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Despite recent rumours to the contrary here, the RMT has just
>>>>>>>>>> settled
>>>>>>>>>> their ongoing dispute.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> There were no such rumours here.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Don't be ridiculous, in the last couple of weeks you posted a
>>>>>>>> sarcastic
>>>>>>>> comment to the effect I'd not noticed the RMT dispute was
>>>>>>>> settled in the
>>>>>>>> Spring.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Nice try, but no cigar!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It was pointed out that the RMT dispute with Network Rail was
>>>>>>> settled in
>>>>>>> the spring.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That "small print" was omitted.
>>>>>
>>>>> No it wasn't. You just didn't understand the difference. If you
>>>>> wish to
>>>>> provide a bumptious commentary on the rail industry without looking
>>>>> very
>>>>> silly, you do need to make some effort to understand it.
>>>>
>>>> Yet more lies.
>>>>
>>>>>> Indeed our laid-back friend has
>>>>>> confirmed this afternoon that his opinion is nothing new has just
>>>>>> been
>>>>>> agreed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There has been an ongoing (until yesterday) RMT dispute with
>>>>>>> most of the TOCs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, most of us understand that. There's just one refusenik.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, you.
>>>>>
>>>>> You seem not to know the difference between the RDG and NR.
>>>>
>>>> It's preposterous to suggest any people here don't know that
>>>> difference.
>>>>
>>>>> The RMT had different disputes with both and separate series of
>>>>> strikes. The NR dispute was settled months ago, and the RDG one this
>>>>> week. And, no, that won't stop the drivers' strikes as very few of
>>>>> them
>>>>> are RMT members.
>>>>
>>>> What surprises me is how much disruption the RMT-who-work-for-TOCs
>>>> caused, when I agree so few are train drivers (outside TfL anyway).
>>>>
>>>> You don't need to cancel a train just because an RMT person who might
>>>> have cleaned the toilet on board is on strike. And yes, I've seen
>>>> increasing numbers of trains with toilets locked out etc, recently.
>>>  Lots of services depend on a guard and platform dispatch staff.
>>
>> And they all depend on signal staff.
>
> Do keep up! That's the dispute settled in the Spring, isn't it.

Till next spring :-)
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
> In message <ukfi7h$2dgni$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:24:33 on Sat, 2 Dec
> 2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On 02/12/2023 15:11, Tweed wrote:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <3ooaN.13$XUo2.1@fx14.ams1>, at 17:06:07 on Fri, 1 Dec 2023,
>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <ukcqk6$1t8ro$1@dont-email.me>, at 14:29:26 on Fri, 1 Dec
>>>>>>> 2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In message <IPhaN.87461$OAC8.26087@fx09.ams1>, at 09:37:44 on
>>>>>>>>> Fri, 1 Dec
>>>>>>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Despite recent rumours to the contrary here, the RMT has just settled
>>>>>>>>>>> their ongoing dispute.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> There were no such rumours here.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Don't be ridiculous, in the last couple of weeks you posted a
>>>>>>>>> sarcastic comment to the effect I'd not noticed the RMT dispute
>>>>>>>>> was settled in the Spring.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Nice try, but no cigar!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It was pointed out that the RMT dispute with Network Rail was settled in
>>>>>>>> the spring.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That "small print" was omitted.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No it wasn't. You just didn't understand the difference. If you wish to
>>>>>> provide a bumptious commentary on the rail industry without looking very
>>>>>> silly, you do need to make some effort to understand it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yet more lies.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Indeed our laid-back friend has
>>>>>>> confirmed this afternoon that his opinion is nothing new has just been
>>>>>>> agreed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There has been an ongoing (until yesterday) RMT dispute with
>>>>>>>> most of the TOCs.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes, most of us understand that. There's just one refusenik.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You seem not to know the difference between the RDG and NR.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's preposterous to suggest any people here don't know that difference.
>>>>>
>>>>>> The RMT had different disputes with both and separate series of
>>>>>> strikes. The NR dispute was settled months ago, and the RDG one this
>>>>>> week. And, no, that won't stop the drivers' strikes as very few of them
>>>>>> are RMT members.
>>>>>
>>>>> What surprises me is how much disruption the RMT-who-work-for-TOCs
>>>>> caused, when I agree so few are train drivers (outside TfL anyway).
>>>>>
>>>>> You don't need to cancel a train just because an RMT person who might
>>>>> have cleaned the toilet on board is on strike. And yes, I've seen
>>>>> increasing numbers of trains with toilets locked out etc, recently.
>>>>
>>>> Lots of services depend on a guard and platform dispatch staff.
>>>>
>>>
>>> And they all depend on signal staff.
>>
>> But the signal staff settled long ago. But back to Roland’s point - the
>> RMT-who-work-for-TOCs are needed (see guards and dispatch staff amongst
>> many others), they aren’t employed just for the fun of it. §
>
> The majority of stations round here are unmanned, so no dispatch staff
> to go on strike. What I don't know is if the one station which *is*
> manned is a poison pill for all the others.

Yes but the terminus station is likely to need staff as will a few
intermediate larger stations. There aren’t many railway lines that can be
operated solely by a driver.

In message <ukfmmi$2e6sa$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:40:50 on Sat, 2 Dec
2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>> In message <ukfi7h$2dgni$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:24:33 on Sat, 2 Dec
>> 2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> On 02/12/2023 15:11, Tweed wrote:
>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> In message <3ooaN.13$XUo2.1@fx14.ams1>, at 17:06:07 on Fri, 1 Dec 2023,
>>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>> In message <ukcqk6$1t8ro$1@dont-email.me>, at 14:29:26 on Fri, 1 Dec
>>>>>>>> 2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> In message <IPhaN.87461$OAC8.26087@fx09.ams1>, at 09:37:44 on
>>>>>>>>>> Fri, 1 Dec
>>>>>>>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Despite recent rumours to the contrary here, the RMT has
>>>>>>>>>>>>just settled their ongoing dispute.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> There were no such rumours here.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Don't be ridiculous, in the last couple of weeks you posted a
>>>>>>>>>> sarcastic comment to the effect I'd not noticed the RMT dispute
>>>>>>>>>> was settled in the Spring.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Nice try, but no cigar!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It was pointed out that the RMT dispute with Network Rail was
>>>>>>>>>settled in the spring.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That "small print" was omitted.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No it wasn't. You just didn't understand the difference. If you wish to
>>>>>>> provide a bumptious commentary on the rail industry without looking very
>>>>>>> silly, you do need to make some effort to understand it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yet more lies.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Indeed our laid-back friend has confirmed this afternoon that
>>>>>>>>his opinion is nothing new has just been agreed.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> There has been an ongoing (until yesterday) RMT dispute with
>>>>>>>>> most of the TOCs.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yes, most of us understand that. There's just one refusenik.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes, you.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You seem not to know the difference between the RDG and NR.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's preposterous to suggest any people here don't know that difference.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The RMT had different disputes with both and separate series of
>>>>>>> strikes. The NR dispute was settled months ago, and the RDG one this
>>>>>>> week. And, no, that won't stop the drivers' strikes as very few of them
>>>>>>> are RMT members.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What surprises me is how much disruption the RMT-who-work-for-TOCs
>>>>>> caused, when I agree so few are train drivers (outside TfL anyway).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You don't need to cancel a train just because an RMT person who might
>>>>>> have cleaned the toilet on board is on strike. And yes, I've seen
>>>>>> increasing numbers of trains with toilets locked out etc, recently.
>>>>>
>>>>> Lots of services depend on a guard and platform dispatch staff.
>>>>
>>>> And they all depend on signal staff.
>>>
>>> But the signal staff settled long ago. But back to Roland’s point - the
>>> RMT-who-work-for-TOCs are needed (see guards and dispatch staff amongst
>>> many others), they aren’t employed just for the fun of it. §
>>
>> The majority of stations round here are unmanned, so no dispatch staff
>> to go on strike. What I don't know is if the one station which *is*
>> manned is a poison pill for all the others.
>
>Yes but the terminus station is likely to need staff as will a few
>intermediate larger stations. There aren’t many railway lines that can be
>operated solely by a driver.

I don't think I saw any platform dispatchers at Stansted Airport.
--
Roland Perry

On 02/12/2023 15:14, Graeme Wall wrote:
> On 02/12/2023 14:54, Bevan Price wrote:
>> On 01/12/2023 13:13, Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
>>> Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>>>> On 01/12/2023 07:16, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>> Despite recent rumours to the contrary here, the RMT has just settled
>>>>> their ongoing dispute.
>>>>>
>>>>> ASLEF continue in their campaign to convince people to explore other
>>>>> transport options than rail.
>>>>>
>>>> Do you have a reference to assert your claims?
>>>>
>>>
>>> The RMT dispute is not 'settled' as such; the current industrial
>>> action is
>>> called off as a pay deal for *2022* has been agreed; 2023's pay deal
>>> negotiations and potential T&C changes begin in early 2024 at TOC level.
>>>
>>> ASLEF haven't been offered the same agreement as the RMT has; if that
>>> were
>>> offered I feel confident that the forthcoming action would be postponed
>>> while it was put to a vote [1].
>>>
>>> [1] ASLEF's rules (agreed and voted on by the members) state that a pay
>>> deal cannot be put to the membership if the recommendation from the
>>> Executive Committee is that members should reject it; that's why none of
>>> the previous offers have been put to ballot.
>>>
>>>
>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver
>>>
>>
>> I wonder what would happen if DfT/TOCs put more pressure on ASLEF -
>> e.g. saying that for each future strike day, drivers' annual pay will
>> be reduced by, say £1000 per year? (To help compensate for lost
>> revenue. Of course that might mean some changes to the law, but there
>> are probably enough Tories to force such a change through Parliament.)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> That would get you straight into various courts for a long time. This
> government hasn't got enough time left for any new and contentious
> legislation.
>

HMG will do whatever it takes if they believe it will gain them votes.

On 02/12/2023 19:19, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <ukfmmi$2e6sa$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:40:50 on Sat, 2 Dec
> 2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <ukfi7h$2dgni$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:24:33 on Sat, 2 Dec
>>> 2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> On 02/12/2023 15:11, Tweed wrote:
>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <3ooaN.13$XUo2.1@fx14.ams1>, at 17:06:07 on Fri, 1 Dec
>>>>>>> 2023,
>>>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In message <ukcqk6$1t8ro$1@dont-email.me>, at 14:29:26 on Fri,
>>>>>>>>> 1 Dec
>>>>>>>>> 2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> In message <IPhaN.87461$OAC8.26087@fx09.ams1>, at 09:37:44 on
>>>>>>>>>>> Fri, 1 Dec
>>>>>>>>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Despite recent rumours to the contrary here, the RMT has
>>>>>>>>>>>>> just settled  their ongoing dispute.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> There were no such rumours here.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Don't be ridiculous, in the last couple of weeks you posted a
>>>>>>>>>>> sarcastic  comment to the effect I'd not noticed the RMT dispute
>>>>>>>>>>> was settled in the  Spring.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Nice try, but no cigar!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It was pointed out that the RMT dispute with Network Rail was
>>>>>>>>>> settled in  the spring.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> That "small print" was omitted.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No it wasn't. You just didn't understand the difference. If you
>>>>>>>> wish to
>>>>>>>> provide a bumptious commentary on the rail industry without
>>>>>>>> looking very
>>>>>>>> silly, you do need to make some effort to understand it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yet more lies.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Indeed our laid-back friend has  confirmed this afternoon that
>>>>>>>>> his opinion is nothing new has just been  agreed.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> There has been an ongoing (until yesterday) RMT dispute with
>>>>>>>>>> most of the TOCs.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Yes, most of us understand that. There's just one refusenik.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yes, you.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You seem not to know the difference between the RDG and NR.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's preposterous to suggest any people here don't know that
>>>>>>> difference.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The RMT had different disputes with both and separate series of
>>>>>>>> strikes. The NR dispute was settled months ago, and the RDG one
>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>> week. And, no, that won't stop the drivers' strikes as very few
>>>>>>>> of them
>>>>>>>> are RMT members.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What surprises me is how much disruption the RMT-who-work-for-TOCs
>>>>>>> caused, when I agree so few are train drivers (outside TfL anyway).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You don't need to cancel a train just because an RMT person who
>>>>>>> might
>>>>>>> have cleaned the toilet on board is on strike. And yes, I've seen
>>>>>>> increasing numbers of trains with toilets locked out etc, recently.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Lots of services depend on a guard and platform dispatch staff.
>>>>>
>>>>> And they all depend on signal staff.
>>>>
>>>> But the signal staff settled long ago. But back to Roland’s point - the
>>>> RMT-who-work-for-TOCs are needed (see guards and dispatch staff amongst
>>>> many others), they aren’t employed just for the fun of it. §
>>>
>>> The majority of stations round here are unmanned, so no dispatch staff
>>> to go on strike. What I don't know is if the one station which *is*
>>> manned is a poison pill for all the others.
>>
>> Yes but the terminus station is likely to need staff as will a few
>> intermediate larger stations. There aren’t many railway lines that can be
>> operated solely by a driver.
>
> I don't think I saw any platform dispatchers at Stansted Airport.

There'll be risk assessments for every relevant train type (and length)
on every platform on every railway station. For instance IETs must have
a dispatcher at Carmarthen and some were cancelled recently because none
were available.

On 02/12/2023 21:50, Coffee wrote:
> On 02/12/2023 15:14, Graeme Wall wrote:
>> On 02/12/2023 14:54, Bevan Price wrote:
>>> On 01/12/2023 13:13, Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
>>>> Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>>>>> On 01/12/2023 07:16, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>> Despite recent rumours to the contrary here, the RMT has just settled
>>>>>> their ongoing dispute.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ASLEF continue in their campaign to convince people to explore other
>>>>>> transport options than rail.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Do you have a reference to assert your claims?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The RMT dispute is not 'settled' as such; the current industrial
>>>> action is
>>>> called off as a pay deal for *2022* has been agreed; 2023's pay deal
>>>> negotiations and potential T&C changes begin in early 2024 at TOC
>>>> level.
>>>>
>>>> ASLEF haven't been offered the same agreement as the RMT has; if
>>>> that were
>>>> offered I feel confident that the forthcoming action would be postponed
>>>> while it was put to a vote [1].
>>>>
>>>> [1] ASLEF's rules (agreed and voted on by the members) state that a pay
>>>> deal cannot be put to the membership if the recommendation from the
>>>> Executive Committee is that members should reject it; that's why
>>>> none of
>>>> the previous offers have been put to ballot.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver
>>>>
>>>
>>> I wonder what would happen if DfT/TOCs put more pressure on ASLEF -
>>> e.g. saying that for each future strike day, drivers' annual pay will
>>> be reduced by, say £1000 per year? (To help compensate for lost
>>> revenue. Of course that might mean some changes to the law, but there
>>> are probably enough Tories to force such a change through Parliament.)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> That would get you straight into various courts for a long time. This
>> government hasn't got enough time left for any new and contentious
>> legislation.
>>
>
> HMG will do whatever it takes if they believe it will gain them votes.

That won't help them get more divisive legislation through in the short
time they have left. Especially as they are still desperate to try and
force through Cruella's Rwanda Travel Agency despite the fact it will
need major changes to several differing pieces of existing legislation,
each one of which will be a major headache.

None of which will actually be greatly to their electoral advantage as
they address areas that are not of prime concern to the electorate any
more. It will keep the Daily Mail happy though, and that is apparently
all that matters.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On 02/12/2023 21:50, Coffee wrote:
>> On 02/12/2023 15:14, Graeme Wall wrote:
>>> On 02/12/2023 14:54, Bevan Price wrote:
>>>> On 01/12/2023 13:13, Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
>>>>> Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> On 01/12/2023 07:16, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>> Despite recent rumours to the contrary here, the RMT has just settled
>>>>>>> their ongoing dispute.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ASLEF continue in their campaign to convince people to explore other
>>>>>>> transport options than rail.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do you have a reference to assert your claims?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The RMT dispute is not 'settled' as such; the current industrial
>>>>> action is
>>>>> called off as a pay deal for *2022* has been agreed; 2023's pay deal
>>>>> negotiations and potential T&C changes begin in early 2024 at TOC
>>>>> level.
>>>>>
>>>>> ASLEF haven't been offered the same agreement as the RMT has; if
>>>>> that were
>>>>> offered I feel confident that the forthcoming action would be postponed
>>>>> while it was put to a vote [1].
>>>>>
>>>>> [1] ASLEF's rules (agreed and voted on by the members) state that a pay
>>>>> deal cannot be put to the membership if the recommendation from the
>>>>> Executive Committee is that members should reject it; that's why
>>>>> none of
>>>>> the previous offers have been put to ballot.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I wonder what would happen if DfT/TOCs put more pressure on ASLEF -
>>>> e.g. saying that for each future strike day, drivers' annual pay will
>>>> be reduced by, say £1000 per year? (To help compensate for lost
>>>> revenue. Of course that might mean some changes to the law, but there
>>>> are probably enough Tories to force such a change through Parliament.)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> That would get you straight into various courts for a long time. This
>>> government hasn't got enough time left for any new and contentious
>>> legislation.
>>>
>>
>> HMG will do whatever it takes if they believe it will gain them votes.
>
> That won't help them get more divisive legislation through in the short
> time they have left. Especially as they are still desperate to try and
> force through Cruella's Rwanda Travel Agency despite the fact it will
> need major changes to several differing pieces of existing legislation,
> each one of which will be a major headache.
>
> None of which will actually be greatly to their electoral advantage as
> they address areas that are not of prime concern to the electorate any
> more. It will keep the Daily Mail happy though, and that is apparently
> all that matters.
>

The Tories are worried about bleeding lots of right-wing anti-immigration
voters to the Farage party. It won't win any seats, but could cause the
Tories to lose a lot of seats to Labour. Labour is very likely to win
anyway, but Farage could help turn it into a landslide.

In message <ukg999$2gvt7$2@dont-email.me>, at 21:58:01 on Sat, 2 Dec
2023, Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> remarked:
>On 02/12/2023 19:19, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <ukfmmi$2e6sa$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:40:50 on Sat, 2 Dec
>>2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <ukfi7h$2dgni$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:24:33 on Sat, 2 Dec
>>>> 2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> On 02/12/2023 15:11, Tweed wrote:
>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>> In message <3ooaN.13$XUo2.1@fx14.ams1>, at 17:06:07 on Fri, 1
>>>>>>>>Dec 2023,
>>>>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> In message <ukcqk6$1t8ro$1@dont-email.me>, at 14:29:26 on
>>>>>>>>>>Fri, 1 Dec
>>>>>>>>>> 2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> In message <IPhaN.87461$OAC8.26087@fx09.ams1>, at 09:37:44 on
>>>>>>>>>>>> Fri, 1 Dec
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Despite recent rumours to the contrary here, the RMT has
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>just settled  their ongoing dispute.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> There were no such rumours here.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Don't be ridiculous, in the last couple of weeks you posted a
>>>>>>>>>>>> sarcastic  comment to the effect I'd not noticed the RMT dispute
>>>>>>>>>>>> was settled in the  Spring.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Nice try, but no cigar!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> It was pointed out that the RMT dispute with Network Rail
>>>>>>>>>>>was settled in  the spring.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> That "small print" was omitted.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No it wasn't. You just didn't understand the difference. If
>>>>>>>>>you wish to provide a bumptious commentary on the rail
>>>>>>>>>industry without looking very silly, you do need to make some
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yet more lies.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Indeed our laid-back friend has  confirmed this afternoon
>>>>>>>>>>that his opinion is nothing new has just been  agreed.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> There has been an ongoing (until yesterday) RMT dispute with
>>>>>>>>>>> most of the TOCs.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Yes, most of us understand that. There's just one refusenik.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Yes, you.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You seem not to know the difference between the RDG and NR.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It's preposterous to suggest any people here don't know that
>>>>>>>>difference.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The RMT had different disputes with both and separate series
>>>>>>>>> strikes. The NR dispute was settled months ago, and the RDG
>>>>>>>>>one this week. And, no, that won't stop the drivers' strikes
>>>>>>>>>as very few of them are RMT members.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What surprises me is how much disruption the RMT-who-work-for-TOCs
>>>>>>>> caused, when I agree so few are train drivers (outside TfL anyway).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You don't need to cancel a train just because an RMT person who
>>>>>>>>might have cleaned the toilet on board is on strike. And yes,
>>>>>>>>I've seen increasing numbers of trains with toilets locked out
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Lots of services depend on a guard and platform dispatch staff.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And they all depend on signal staff.
>>>>>
>>>>> But the signal staff settled long ago. But back to Roland’s point - the
>>>>> RMT-who-work-for-TOCs are needed (see guards and dispatch staff amongst
>>>>> many others), they aren’t employed just for the fun of it. §
>>>>
>>>> The majority of stations round here are unmanned, so no dispatch staff
>>>> to go on strike. What I don't know is if the one station which *is*
>>>> manned is a poison pill for all the others.
>>>
>>> Yes but the terminus station is likely to need staff as will a few
>>> intermediate larger stations. There aren’t many railway lines that can be
>>> operated solely by a driver.

>> I don't think I saw any platform dispatchers at Stansted Airport.
>
>There'll be risk assessments for every relevant train type (and length)
>on every platform on every railway station. For instance IETs must
>have a dispatcher at Carmarthen and some were cancelled recently
>because none were available.

I'm sure there will be such risk assessments, but I'm challenging the
sweeping statement made about specifically terminus stations.

Kings Lynn for example is served by 1tph OPO service, and I wouldn't
expect them to employ a dispatcher. Similarly I think the terminus
platforms at Cambrridge (for the trains to Norwich) are self-dispatched
by the driver/guard, even if some of the through platforms [mainly
trains to/from London] do have dispatchers.
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
> In message <ukg999$2gvt7$2@dont-email.me>, at 21:58:01 on Sat, 2 Dec
> 2023, Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> remarked:
>> On 02/12/2023 19:19, Roland Perry wrote:
>>> In message <ukfmmi$2e6sa$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:40:50 on Sat, 2 Dec
>>> 2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <ukfi7h$2dgni$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:24:33 on Sat, 2 Dec
>>>>> 2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 02/12/2023 15:11, Tweed wrote:
>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In message <3ooaN.13$XUo2.1@fx14.ams1>, at 17:06:07 on Fri, 1
>>>>>>>>> Dec 2023,
>>>>>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> In message <ukcqk6$1t8ro$1@dont-email.me>, at 14:29:26 on
>>>>>>>>>>> Fri, 1 Dec
>>>>>>>>>>> 2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> In message <IPhaN.87461$OAC8.26087@fx09.ams1>, at 09:37:44 on
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fri, 1 Dec
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Despite recent rumours to the contrary here, the RMT has
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> just settled  their ongoing dispute.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There were no such rumours here.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Don't be ridiculous, in the last couple of weeks you posted a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> sarcastic  comment to the effect I'd not noticed the RMT dispute
>>>>>>>>>>>>> was settled in the  Spring.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nice try, but no cigar!
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> It was pointed out that the RMT dispute with Network Rail
>>>>>>>>>>>> was settled in  the spring.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> That "small print" was omitted.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> No it wasn't. You just didn't understand the difference. If
>>>>>>>>>> you wish to provide a bumptious commentary on the rail
>>>>>>>>>> industry without looking very silly, you do need to make some
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Yet more lies.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Indeed our laid-back friend has  confirmed this afternoon
>>>>>>>>>>> that his opinion is nothing new has just been  agreed.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> There has been an ongoing (until yesterday) RMT dispute with
>>>>>>>>>>>> most of the TOCs.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, most of us understand that. There's just one refusenik.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Yes, you.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You seem not to know the difference between the RDG and NR.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It's preposterous to suggest any people here don't know that
>>>>>>>>> difference.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The RMT had different disputes with both and separate series
>>>>>>>>>> strikes. The NR dispute was settled months ago, and the RDG
>>>>>>>>>> one this week. And, no, that won't stop the drivers' strikes
>>>>>>>>>> as very few of them are RMT members.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What surprises me is how much disruption the RMT-who-work-for-TOCs
>>>>>>>>> caused, when I agree so few are train drivers (outside TfL anyway).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You don't need to cancel a train just because an RMT person who
>>>>>>>>> might have cleaned the toilet on board is on strike. And yes,
>>>>>>>>> I've seen increasing numbers of trains with toilets locked out
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Lots of services depend on a guard and platform dispatch staff.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And they all depend on signal staff.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But the signal staff settled long ago. But back to Roland’s point - the
>>>>>> RMT-who-work-for-TOCs are needed (see guards and dispatch staff amongst
>>>>>> many others), they aren’t employed just for the fun of it. §
>>>>>
>>>>> The majority of stations round here are unmanned, so no dispatch staff
>>>>> to go on strike. What I don't know is if the one station which *is*
>>>>> manned is a poison pill for all the others.
>>>>
>>>> Yes but the terminus station is likely to need staff as will a few
>>>> intermediate larger stations. There aren’t many railway lines that can be
>>>> operated solely by a driver.
>
>>> I don't think I saw any platform dispatchers at Stansted Airport.
>>
>> There'll be risk assessments for every relevant train type (and length)
>> on every platform on every railway station. For instance IETs must
>> have a dispatcher at Carmarthen and some were cancelled recently
>> because none were available.
>
> I'm sure there will be such risk assessments, but I'm challenging the
> sweeping statement made about specifically terminus stations.
>
> Kings Lynn for example is served by 1tph OPO service, and I wouldn't
> expect them to employ a dispatcher. Similarly I think the terminus
> platforms at Cambrridge (for the trains to Norwich) are self-dispatched
> by the driver/guard, even if some of the through platforms [mainly
> trains to/from London] do have dispatchers.

The point is that there’s very few, if any, railway lines that can be
operated only by the driver. There’s more to RMT TOC jobs than cleaning the
toilets, which appeared to be Roland’s original position. Larger stations
probably require staff to supervise evacuations/other emergencies. I
imagine this to be the case at Stansted.

In message <ukhcsg$2peej$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:05:36 on Sun, 3 Dec
2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>> In message <ukg999$2gvt7$2@dont-email.me>, at 21:58:01 on Sat, 2 Dec
>> 2023, Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> remarked:
>>> On 02/12/2023 19:19, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>> In message <ukfmmi$2e6sa$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:40:50 on Sat, 2 Dec
>>>> 2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> In message <ukfi7h$2dgni$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:24:33 on Sat, 2 Dec
>>>>>> 2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 02/12/2023 15:11, Tweed wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> In message <3ooaN.13$XUo2.1@fx14.ams1>, at 17:06:07 on Fri, 1
>>>>>>>>>> Dec 2023,
>>>>>>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> In message <ukcqk6$1t8ro$1@dont-email.me>, at 14:29:26 on
>>>>>>>>>>>> Fri, 1 Dec
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In message <IPhaN.87461$OAC8.26087@fx09.ams1>, at 09:37:44 on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fri, 1 Dec
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Despite recent rumours to the contrary here, the RMT has
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> just settled  their ongoing dispute.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There were no such rumours here.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Don't be ridiculous, in the last couple of weeks you posted a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sarcastic  comment to the effect I'd not noticed the RMT dispute
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was settled in the  Spring.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nice try, but no cigar!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> It was pointed out that the RMT dispute with Network Rail
>>>>>>>>>>>>> was settled in  the spring.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> That "small print" was omitted.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> No it wasn't. You just didn't understand the difference. If
>>>>>>>>>>> you wish to provide a bumptious commentary on the rail
>>>>>>>>>>> industry without looking very silly, you do need to make some
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Yet more lies.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Indeed our laid-back friend has  confirmed this afternoon
>>>>>>>>>>>> that his opinion is nothing new has just been  agreed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> There has been an ongoing (until yesterday) RMT dispute with
>>>>>>>>>>>>> most of the TOCs.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, most of us understand that. There's just one refusenik.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, you.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> You seem not to know the difference between the RDG and NR.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It's preposterous to suggest any people here don't know that
>>>>>>>>>> difference.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The RMT had different disputes with both and separate series
>>>>>>>>>>> strikes. The NR dispute was settled months ago, and the RDG
>>>>>>>>>>> one this week. And, no, that won't stop the drivers' strikes
>>>>>>>>>>> as very few of them are RMT members.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> What surprises me is how much disruption the RMT-who-work-for-TOCs
>>>>>>>>>> caused, when I agree so few are train drivers (outside TfL anyway).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You don't need to cancel a train just because an RMT person who
>>>>>>>>>> might have cleaned the toilet on board is on strike. And yes,
>>>>>>>>>> I've seen increasing numbers of trains with toilets locked out
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Lots of services depend on a guard and platform dispatch staff.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And they all depend on signal staff.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But the signal staff settled long ago. But back to Roland’s
>>>>>>>point - the RMT-who-work-for-TOCs are needed (see guards and
>>>>>>>dispatch staff amongst many others), they aren’t employed just
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The majority of stations round here are unmanned, so no dispatch staff
>>>>>> to go on strike. What I don't know is if the one station which *is*
>>>>>> manned is a poison pill for all the others.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes but the terminus station is likely to need staff as will a few
>>>>>intermediate larger stations. There aren’t many railway lines
>>>>>that can be operated solely by a driver.
>>
>>>> I don't think I saw any platform dispatchers at Stansted Airport.
>>>
>>> There'll be risk assessments for every relevant train type (and length)
>>> on every platform on every railway station. For instance IETs must
>>> have a dispatcher at Carmarthen and some were cancelled recently
>>> because none were available.
>>
>> I'm sure there will be such risk assessments, but I'm challenging the
>> sweeping statement made about specifically terminus stations.
>>
>> Kings Lynn for example is served by 1tph OPO service, and I wouldn't
>> expect them to employ a dispatcher. Similarly I think the terminus
>> platforms at Cambrridge (for the trains to Norwich) are self-dispatched
>> by the driver/guard, even if some of the through platforms [mainly
>> trains to/from London] do have dispatchers.
>
>The point is that there’s very few, if any, railway lines that can be
>operated only by the driver. There’s more to RMT TOC jobs than cleaning the
>toilets, which appeared to be Roland’s original position. Larger stations
>probably require staff to supervise evacuations/other emergencies. I
>imagine this to be the case at Stansted.

You overestimate the number of stations manned by anyone at all.

Last time I was at Littleport I met a railway employee who'd driven all
the way from Downham Market to assist one wheelchair passenger onto a
London-bound train. In the grand scheme of things, it would have saved
them a fortune to pay for a taxi to Ely, where they do normally have
station staff.
--
Roland Perry

Bevan Price <bevanprice666@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 01/12/2023 13:13, Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
>> Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>>> On 01/12/2023 07:16, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>> Despite recent rumours to the contrary here, the RMT has just settled
>>>> their ongoing dispute.
>>>>
>>>> ASLEF continue in their campaign to convince people to explore other
>>>> transport options than rail.
>>>>
>>> Do you have a reference to assert your claims?
>>>
>>
>> The RMT dispute is not 'settled' as such; the current industrial action is
>> called off as a pay deal for *2022* has been agreed; 2023's pay deal
>> negotiations and potential T&C changes begin in early 2024 at TOC level.
>>
>> ASLEF haven't been offered the same agreement as the RMT has; if that were
>> offered I feel confident that the forthcoming action would be postponed
>> while it was put to a vote [1].
>>
>> [1] ASLEF's rules (agreed and voted on by the members) state that a pay
>> deal cannot be put to the membership if the recommendation from the
>> Executive Committee is that members should reject it; that's why none of
>> the previous offers have been put to ballot.
>>
>>
>> Anna Noyd-Dryver
>>
>
> I wonder what would happen if DfT/TOCs put more pressure on ASLEF - e.g.
> saying that for each future strike day, drivers' annual pay will be
> reduced by, say £1000 per year? (To help compensate for lost revenue. Of
> course that might mean some changes to the law, but there are probably
> enough Tories to force such a change through Parliament.)
>

One would hope it would be found thoroughly illegal.

Besides which, it'd be virtually impossible to implement.

I've been quite lucky during this dispute with many of the strike dates
falling when I was off work anyway (rest day, leave or sick) - would I get
penalised for those, for other drivers striking on a day I wasn’t due to
work anyway? But why should my less fortunate colleagues be penalised more
under this scheme when it’s purely chance that they were booked to work on
more of the strike dates? Poor Jimmy, he’s only paid £2000 a year because
he was unlucky!

What’s to stop the TOC then putting everyone's pay back to the proper level
at the next pay deal?

Presumably new entrants get the full pay? So having lost, potentially, ten
grand in pay, I leave my TOC, join another TOC on full pay. Another few
strike days and I’ve lost a few thousand of pay again, so I leave there and
rejoin my original employer on full pay again?

Anna Noyd-Dryver