Southern Rail Strike - right or wrong - Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Southern Rail Strike - right or wrong

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 71 of 74 < 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 >

7mins In the bush 05 Feb 17 10.30am
Originally posted by matt_himself It appears from the outside that Southern has divided and conquered. Not knowing the negotiations, but from what I have read, it appears that the RMT is bitter about ASLEF agreeing a deal on their own. It's hard to jointly negotiate with two different unions that have separate aims. I think ASLEF has probably won on points.
Alert a moderator to this post

7mins

In the bush 05 Feb 17 10.30am

Originally posted by matt_himself

It appears from the outside that Southern has divided and conquered.

Not knowing the negotiations, but from what I have read, it appears that the RMT is bitter about ASLEF agreeing a deal on their own.

It's hard to jointly negotiate with two different unions that have separate aims. I think ASLEF has probably won on points.

Alert a moderator to this post

Hoof Hearted 05 Feb 17 10.35am
I find it amusingly ironic that we have two separate threads going concurrently on this topic!
Alert a moderator to this post

Hoof Hearted 05 Feb 17 10.35am

I find it amusingly ironic that we have two separate threads going concurrently on this topic!

Alert a moderator to this post

matt_himself Matataland 05 Feb 17 10.45am
Originally posted by 7mins It's hard to jointly negotiate with two different unions that have separate aims. I think ASLEF has probably won on points. [Link] I thought their aims were the same. Passenger safety was held up as the reason for the strike from both unions. I find it strange that this is the outcome given that stance by both unions. "That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02
Alert a moderator to this post

matt_himself

Matataland 05 Feb 17 10.45am

Originally posted by 7mins

It's hard to jointly negotiate with two different unions that have separate aims. I think ASLEF has probably won on points.

[Link]

I thought their aims were the same. Passenger safety was held up as the reason for the strike from both unions.

I find it strange that this is the outcome given that stance by both unions.

"That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02

Alert a moderator to this post

gambler Kent 05 Feb 17 11.58am
Aslef havent agreed a deal. They've simply agreed to put something to a vote of their members. The members are the ones who need to agree. Aslef members will be voting on this deal. It won't be accepted. No way. Anyone saying that the staff have been divided and conquered you need to hold fire on that I'm afraid. Sadly for the long suffering passengers this thing is far from over.
Alert a moderator to this post

gambler

Kent 05 Feb 17 11.58am

Aslef havent agreed a deal. They've simply agreed to put something to a vote of their members. The members are the ones who need to agree.

Aslef members will be voting on this deal. It won't be accepted. No way.

Anyone saying that the staff have been divided and conquered you need to hold fire on that I'm afraid.

Sadly for the long suffering passengers this thing is far from over.

Alert a moderator to this post

7mins In the bush 05 Feb 17 1.18pm
Originally posted by matt_himself [Link] I thought their aims were the same. Passenger safety was held up as the reason for the strike from both unions. I find it strange that this is the outcome given that stance by both unions. You can't have RMT discussion driver indemnity insurance, upgrading of in cab cctv, relocation deals and subsequent training of freight train drivers and the rewriting of drivers employment contracts (DRI)
Alert a moderator to this post

7mins

In the bush 05 Feb 17 1.18pm

Originally posted by matt_himself

[Link]

I thought their aims were the same. Passenger safety was held up as the reason for the strike from both unions.

I find it strange that this is the outcome given that stance by both unions.

You can't have RMT discussion driver indemnity insurance, upgrading of in cab cctv, relocation deals and subsequent training of freight train drivers and the rewriting of drivers employment contracts (DRI)

Alert a moderator to this post

7mins In the bush 05 Feb 17 1.24pm
Originally posted by matt_himself [Link] I thought their aims were the same. Passenger safety was held up as the reason for the strike from both unions. I find it strange that this is the outcome given that stance by both unions. Do you not think the agreement with ASLEF is all about passenger safety? To me... it totally vindicates their actions. They have refused £££ that Southern have offered them, and secured a deal that protests passenger safety, while not benefiting financially at all. Southern have come out of this bad. They accepted the deal that was offered before the strikes. Southern had the power to avoid the strikes by accepting this deal when first offered. Drivers have lost thousands to secure this deal. They have been rewarded with safer working practices not extra money.
Alert a moderator to this post

7mins

In the bush 05 Feb 17 1.24pm

Originally posted by matt_himself

[Link]

I thought their aims were the same. Passenger safety was held up as the reason for the strike from both unions.

I find it strange that this is the outcome given that stance by both unions.

Do you not think the agreement with ASLEF is all about passenger safety? To me... it totally vindicates their actions. They have refused £££ that Southern have offered them, and secured a deal that protests passenger safety, while not benefiting financially at all. Southern have come out of this bad. They accepted the deal that was offered before the strikes. Southern had the power to avoid the strikes by accepting this deal when first offered.

Drivers have lost thousands to secure this deal. They have been rewarded with safer working practices not extra money.

Alert a moderator to this post

matt_himself Matataland 05 Feb 17 7.21pm
Originally posted by 7mins Do you not think the agreement with ASLEF is all about passenger safety? To me... it totally vindicates their actions. They have refused £££ that Southern have offered them, and secured a deal that protests passenger safety, while not benefiting financially at all. Southern have come out of this bad. They accepted the deal that was offered before the strikes. Southern had the power to avoid the strikes by accepting this deal when first offered. Drivers have lost thousands to secure this deal. They have been rewarded with safer working practices not extra money. Then why would the RMT state that the ASLEF deal will lead to reduction of staff levels which was the core issue of the dispute? Here is another story stating this: [Link] Edited by matt_himself (05 Feb 2017 7.26pm) "That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02
Alert a moderator to this post

matt_himself

Matataland 05 Feb 17 7.21pm

Originally posted by 7mins

Drivers have lost thousands to secure this deal. They have been rewarded with safer working practices not extra money.

Then why would the RMT state that the ASLEF deal will lead to reduction of staff levels which was the core issue of the dispute?

Here is another story stating this:

[Link]

Edited by matt_himself (05 Feb 2017 7.26pm)

"That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02

Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset Shizzlehurst 05 Feb 17 9.43pm
Originally posted by matt_himself Then why would the RMT state that the ASLEF deal will lead to reduction of staff levels which was the core issue of the dispute? Here is another story stating this: [Link] Edited by matt_himself (05 Feb 2017 7.26pm) Do Aslef drivers not have the choice of refusing to drive a train if they think it is unsafe without an onboard staff member as part of the deal? I may be mistaken.
Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset

Shizzlehurst 05 Feb 17 9.43pm

Originally posted by matt_himself

Then why would the RMT state that the ASLEF deal will lead to reduction of staff levels which was the core issue of the dispute?

Here is another story stating this:

[Link]

Edited by matt_himself (05 Feb 2017 7.26pm)

Do Aslef drivers not have the choice of refusing to drive a train if they think it is unsafe without an onboard staff member as part of the deal? I may be mistaken.

Alert a moderator to this post

7mins In the bush 06 Feb 17 2.26am
Originally posted by matt_himself Then why would the RMT state that the ASLEF deal will lead to reduction of staff levels which was the core issue of the dispute? Here is another story stating this: [Link] Edited by matt_himself (05 Feb 2017 7.26pm) RMT think Southern will reneg on the deal. If ASLEF get it in DRI (drivers employment contract) southern can't go back on their word. It all hinges on what Southern put in drivers new contracts. If ASLEF have taken Southern just on their word, they are foolish. Southern have a long history of lying. If ASLEF get the OBS role written in to the new contract, it will be hard for Southern to go back on their word. Personally... I would get new DRI written up then ask members to vote.
Alert a moderator to this post

7mins

In the bush 06 Feb 17 2.26am

Originally posted by matt_himself

Then why would the RMT state that the ASLEF deal will lead to reduction of staff levels which was the core issue of the dispute?

Here is another story stating this:

[Link]

Edited by matt_himself (05 Feb 2017 7.26pm)

RMT think Southern will reneg on the deal. If ASLEF get it in DRI (drivers employment contract) southern can't go back on their word. It all hinges on what Southern put in drivers new contracts. If ASLEF have taken Southern just on their word, they are foolish. Southern have a long history of lying. If ASLEF get the OBS role written in to the new contract, it will be hard for Southern to go back on their word.
Personally... I would get new DRI written up then ask members to vote.

Alert a moderator to this post

matt_himself Matataland 06 Feb 17 6.53am
Originally posted by 7mins RMT think Southern will reneg on the deal. If ASLEF get it in DRI (drivers employment contract) southern can't go back on their word. It all hinges on what Southern put in drivers new contracts. If ASLEF have taken Southern just on their word, they are foolish. Southern have a long history of lying. If ASLEF get the OBS role written in to the new contract, it will be hard for Southern to go back on their word. Personally... I would get new DRI written up then ask members to vote. I don't doubt your intel but from the outside, something's smells about this deal. "That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02
Alert a moderator to this post

matt_himself

Matataland 06 Feb 17 6.53am

Originally posted by 7mins

I don't doubt your intel but from the outside, something's smells about this deal.

"That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02

Alert a moderator to this post

7mins In the bush 06 Feb 17 7.44am
Originally posted by matt_himself I don't doubt your intel but from the outside, something's smells about this deal. I think this deal might not even get through. The exceptional circumstances clause is too vague, and requires trust from drivers for Southern to honour it. Considering how Southern have lied to drivers recently (they put in writing that they wouldn't extend DOO without consulting unions, then extended it without consultation). I can't see there being the trust there to split the vote. You can't blame the drivers for not trusting a company that has continually lied to its staff and customers. If drivers get the OBS stuff in to DRI. I think they will agree it. Rewriting DRI will cost Southern. The union will use it to get parity with other drivers in the industry.
Alert a moderator to this post

7mins

In the bush 06 Feb 17 7.44am

Originally posted by matt_himself

I don't doubt your intel but from the outside, something's smells about this deal.

I think this deal might not even get through. The exceptional circumstances clause is too vague, and requires trust from drivers for Southern to honour it. Considering how Southern have lied to drivers recently (they put in writing that they wouldn't extend DOO without consulting unions, then extended it without consultation). I can't see there being the trust there to split the vote. You can't blame the drivers for not trusting a company that has continually lied to its staff and customers.

If drivers get the OBS stuff in to DRI. I think they will agree it.
Rewriting DRI will cost Southern. The union will use it to get parity with other drivers in the industry.

Alert a moderator to this post

matt_himself Matataland 06 Feb 17 8.25am
Originally posted by 7mins I think this deal might not even get through. The exceptional circumstances clause is too vague, and requires trust from drivers for Southern to honour it. Considering how Southern have lied to drivers recently (they put in writing that they wouldn't extend DOO without consulting unions, then extended it without consultation). I can't see there being the trust there to split the vote. You can't blame the drivers for not trusting a company that has continually lied to its staff and customers. If drivers get the OBS stuff in to DRI. I think they will agree it. Rewriting DRI will cost Southern. The union will use it to get parity with other drivers in the industry. This is the bit I am struggling with, if the deal is likely unacceptable to drivers why would ASLEF recommend it? It would put ASLEF in a weak position to recommend a deal which drivers subsequent vote down. Also why would ASLEF cut the RMT out of the deal, given their supposed shared aims of 'safety'? This smells rotten. "That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02
Alert a moderator to this post

matt_himself

Matataland 06 Feb 17 8.25am

Originally posted by 7mins

If drivers get the OBS stuff in to DRI. I think they will agree it.
Rewriting DRI will cost Southern. The union will use it to get parity with other drivers in the industry.

This is the bit I am struggling with, if the deal is likely unacceptable to drivers why would ASLEF recommend it? It would put ASLEF in a weak position to recommend a deal which drivers subsequent vote down. Also why would ASLEF cut the RMT out of the deal, given their supposed shared aims of 'safety'?

This smells rotten.

"That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 71 of 74 < 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

Southern Rail Strike - right or wrong

Site Map

New users

Existing users

Sponsors