The union of Southern Rail being taken to the surpeme court

Right thing to do? imagine everyone who uses Southern Rail is beyond sick of the strikes by now.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-38588863

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1

Aj12

Original post by Rock Fan

Right thing to do? imagine everyone who uses Southern Rail is beyond sick of the strikes by now.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-38588863

Southern has insisted it will not back down in the dispute over who should open and close train doors.

Sensing the bbc author may be a passenger. Given the union is lying through their teeth about safety issues, and their members may have been tampering with equipment to prove their point, I struggle to see how this can go on.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 2

Asolare

Can someone give me an unbiased (I said unbiased @ everyone regardless of political orientation) explanation as to what they're actually striking over, before I can form an opinion on this.

I generally support the right to strike but if it's over something petty then I'm not so sure.

Reply 3

epsilondelta

Original post by Inexorably

As far as I'm aware, they are striking over the decision to remove train guards. This would result in lost jobs and less safe trains, according to the strikers. The driver would open and close the doors and there would be no guard to ensure passenger safety. The London tube operates like this.

Reply 4

liverpool786110

Most train guards just stand around all day tbh...

Reply 5

Asolare

Original post by epsilondelta

Hmm I thought this was pretty standard? Whenever I get the train from my station, people always manually open the doors themselves (and normally shut them, but ... actuallly I think there is a conductor who shuts them manually) and I never see anyone checking for safety.

It seems a bit like much ado about nothing but I understand if they're trying to prevent job losses.

Reply 6

epsilondelta

Original post by Inexorably

I have heard them mention passenger safety more so in the case of emergency. I too understand preventing job losses but I also think that we can't reject modernisation and progress over it. It will be interesting to see how it pans out because this will set precedent for all travel strikes

Reply 7

azizadil1998

Original post by epsilondelta

passenger safety is just to try and get us commuters feeling better about it, but it is way too much now. it's causing chaos in so many areas. I personally live in Surrey near Croydon and it puts undue pressure on the tram and local buses. It's really messing up people's travel and for what? to stop these supposedly important train guards? I personally think their role is not significant enough to be kept, especially at off peak times (other than morning and after work/school) most trains are running empty/very quiet, so idk I just feel like their argument is not good enough. Economically speaking its pointless for Southern to have train guards, I mean the Tube has none doesn't it? So why should these trains be exempt?

Reply 8

epsilondelta

Original post by azizadil1998

I agree, I was trying my best to be unbiased :biggrin:

the Tube has none and in my opinion train guards are surplus to requirement
Also, I cannot get my head around the Tube strikes at all...
Some facts I found today:
Train drivers are paid just under £50,000 per year.
A junior doctor does 3-4 years at medical school unpaid, does an F1 year on £26,350, F2 year on £30,500, starts after that on a salary of £36,100 and over a few years progresses to £47,750. After a few more years it might increase up to £70k.
Teachers do 4 years at university unpaid, then are paid 22-28k as a newly qualified teacher depending on where they live (inner, mid- or outer london). A tube driver earns more than some headteachers.
I'm not sure these figures need much comment

Edit: now I've started, I can't stop
The average soldier earns 27.5k and a Captain (!) earns 42k
The average nurse earns just over £23k per year

Yet
We must pay train drivers to press their buttons and make announcements occasionally

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 9

azizadil1998

Original post by epsilondelta

I agree, I was trying my best to be unbiased :biggrin:

Not sure about this but I believe the Tube strikes are for station staff aren't they? Or was that before - maybe now they are for the unsocial working hours for 24 hour Tube? If it's actually for pay then they can really just flip right off because that's ridiculous.

Reply 10

Sephiroth

The simple solution to terrible public transport is to go for driving lessons and get a car. That's what I did a few years ago and I don't look back.

When these awful companies lose enough customers they will go out of business and their routes will become open for new companies who may be able to provide a worthwhile service.

Reply 11

Crb822

They're striking for better services yet these services are closed while they are striking. People rely on these services to get to work and could even end up losing their jobs as a result if they are unable to get there on time. Whatever the outcome, this needs to be sorted out quickly as it's going to be bad for businesses if half their employees are struggling to make it into work.

Reply 12

Jammy Duel

Original post by Inexorably

Officially, a shift to driver only operation as standard (like 30% of the network) claiming, with three decades of evidence to the contrary, that this is less safe and with the train guard jobs being protected until the end of the current management contract in 2021. In reality, who knows, popular thought includes an attack on the government via an already weak part of the network.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 13

Jammy Duel

Original post by azizadil1998

Before was 24h, now it's ticket offices, and of course they cannot possibly even suggest the idea of full automation, the underground would grind to a halt until the union runs out of money

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 14

anarchism101

If they want to stop the strike, then give the strikers their demands. Given this is private sector, I don't really have any sympathy with the employers at all.

Reply 15

Jammy Duel

Original post by anarchism101

If they want to stop the strike, then give the strikers their demands. Given this is private sector, I don't really have any sympathy with the employers at all.

And then when the union sees you're a pushover they won't demand as much as they possibly can get away with because?

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 16

anarchism101

Original post by Jammy Duel

And then when the union sees you're a pushover they won't demand as much as they possibly can get away with because?

Posted from TSR Mobile

I have no objection to them demanding as much as they can possibly get away with.

Reply 17

Jammy Duel

Original post by anarchism101

I have no objection to them demanding as much as they can possibly get away with.

So you believe the unions should run the country?

Reply 18

anarchism101

Original post by Jammy Duel

So you believe the unions should run the country?

In the private sector, pretty much, yes. I'd want to cut out some of the hierarchy from some of them, but other than that, I'm all for it.

Posted from TSR Mobile