Another strike announced....

If a few of these students fell out of a packed Vic line train and got killed, because of lack of door safety equipment, then they would have even more to complain about!

If Comrade Crow's (I like it) members, quite frankly, did their job properly by pressing the correct buttons, then there shouldn't be an issue. I know that's a gross simplification of it, but he's making his members sound like morons. They have less to do on the Vic than any other line as it is for the pay they get. If you're a Vic driver, then I accept I've just offended you, but that's the way it seems to me.

What's worse is that anyone in the know, knows that 09 stock is just around the corner and has the safety features included. Kicking up a fuss now is pointless; fitting this safety equipment to 67s would be a massive waste of public money for very little gain.

What's needed is some interim understanding from the management and the drivers need to ensure they're careful, and we're happy.

Obviously I'm not privy to the discussions between the unions and management, but for there not to be agreement on this there must be some serious lack of compromise from both sides to have reached this position.

My guess (and that is all it is) would be the management's position is that it would be unfair for a Vic line driver and a driver on another line making the same mistake in similar circumstances to be treated differently. If the same (or equivalent) safety system(s) were available on all lines then I don't think that anyone would argue against that (arguments about the nature and/or severity of the treatment would be a different issue).

I would presume though that the union's response is that because the safety equipment isn't present on the Vic line, then the circumstances are not the same as on a line with it, and that drivers on the Vic are being punished for making one mistake in the same manner that drivers on other lines who have made a series of mistakes are.

IF this is the case, then I have to agree with the union.

As a sort-of related question, if the following sequence of events happened on a line with CSDE (or equivalent),
1. Driver presses buttons to open doors on the wrong side of the train
2. CSDE equipment intervenes and the doors do not open
3. Driver notes the doors haven't opened and realises that this is because they've tried to open them on the wrong side
4. Driver presses buttons to open doors on the correct side of the train
5. Doors open, and the rest of the station stop proceeds normally.

Other than a slight delay in the doors opening*, is there any way that someone other than the driver (and anyone else travelling in the cab with them) would know that steps 1-4 happened? If so would any action be taken against the driver?

*Which can be caused by many more things than just this scenario.

I think that no one would notice *unless* the data logger had to be consulted for any reason - and I don't believe any action would be taken.

I read elsewhere (possibly on the Intranet at work, though I won't swear by that) that the driver in question had done it on more than one occasion and had initially denied it. No idea of the truth to that. As with most things, I suspect there's his side, their side and the truth.

I believe on the last strike the ASLEF members refused to cross the RMT picket line.

Also, if there aren't enough drivers to run a reasonable service, there will be no service. It isn't worth running two trains to make a point, as demand will soon outstrip supply.

The whole thing is unfair from any angle. It would be unfair to you if sacked, but it would be unfair to thousands of people (way more than just one) if there were a strike. The unions are there to protect their members, but who's there to protect the traveling publics interests in the same fashion? The unions have way more cards in this respect. If the RMT wants a strike, trains wont run. If London TravelWatch don't want there to be a strike...nothing happens. They have to make do with just complaining, so why can't the RMT? Afterall the transport system is there for the publics patronage, not the employees employment. Yes, there are two sides to everything, but nobody should have the right to unfairly inconvienience anyone else, be it management going heavy-handed on an employee, or the union against the passengers.

On the contrary, I make mistakes every day, but then I have to suffer the consequences. CSDE should be a there to protect passengers, not to cover up employee incompetence.

On other lines the train is being operated by the driver, such as yourself, so s/he has a lot more to balance and for that I respect that in attempting to keep headways low it is easy to concentrate on stopping the train and then push the wrong button.

However on the Victoria the train drives itself, so the operator merely needs to start it and open the doors once it stops, sometimes requiring a hand on the brake to help it. If that can't be done right, where does accident end and negligence begin?

Moving away from controversy, where are ACAS in this?

The problem with the vic line, is it is Auto, so the driver can lose concentration alot quicker than if they was driving the train, and that is why errors happen. The issue with this is so great is because the doors in fact did not open! the data dump from that train shows that if opened at all, they opened for under half a second which is no way enough for them to open, even the video footage from the CCTV had to be seen frame by frame to see that the actual outside door indicator lights went on at all!! and they were actually only seen in 1 frame. So he may have pressed the doors to open on the wrong side, he then tried to follow the correct procedure but aparently he was unable to contact the LC so he continued knowing himself that the doors had not been opened so he had put no one at risk, and rather having the train behind being stuck in a tunnel he moved on to continue with his dutie! honestly, is that such a bad thing? Now where it becomes even worse, is that on other lines normally what happens as punishment is the train op would be demoted to station assistant for a year. How is this fair? they have CSDE!! they OVERRIDE CSDE and get demoted, the vic line doesnt have it, and he gets sacked? hmm

Those of you who do not drive trains will not really have adequate concept of how easy it is to have a momentary lapse of concentration in which you push one pair of buttons instead of another. It is, in fact, far more likely that a T/Op on the Victoria Line will do this for several reasons. Principally the Vic line is entirely in tunnel there are long gaps between stations and not a lot to do or focus upon for the most part of an 8 hour shift, monotony sets in and minds begin to wander. The vast majority of stations have the platform on the same side and most "wrong side door operations" occur when the platform changes side. Warren Street n/b being the most likely as it is the first change after a continuious run from Brixton.

Of course this momentary lapse has much greater consequences on the Victoria line and no consequences on any other line. It is of course what the operator does next that counts, we can probably assume the correct procedure was not then followed in the dispute case. (edit. I note Saybia has detailed events - I'm now even more surprised at the management actions!) However I am aware of more than one case where the correct process was not subsequently followed and the operators although subject to disciplinary machinary were not dismissed. I belive there has been a change and toughening up of managerial stance on the Victoria Line, which is none too popular.

It is pretty clear there would be no dispute had the operator not been dismissed.

You may also be aware that historically the Victoria Line is the line least likely to support any industrial action, in cases of a complete strike call management usually pinned their hopes upon being able to run a partial service (usually Seven Sisters - Victoria) on the Victoria Line and usually did. You may therefore draw a presumption that if a total closure of the Victoria Line was achieved with ASLEF members supporting the RMT action that things on the Vic Line have degenerated to an unprecedednted level and the staff there must believe firmly that changes are needed and that the actions taken agains the T/Op are unfair.

Remember T/Ops do not get paid if they take industrial action, so if staff are willing to loose several days pay they must feel strongly about the matter.

Whilst the principle purpose is clearly not to inconvenience the public, there is no doubt that a withdrawal of labour is the most effective weaponary when negotiations have failed. Blame for the strike, should not be squarely placed upon RMT but more likely upon the actions of local management. Notions that those agrieved by percieved injustice should put up with it because not to do so may marginally inconvenience some third party are, frankly, unrealistic and unconstitutional and a view you'd be far less likely to take were you on the wrong end of the percieved injustice!

With all due respect to Saybia, where has this information come from? As I said previously, we cannot really be sure what happened unless we were directly party to the investigation (in which case we probably ought not to be posting upon a public forum). What the driver & union claim is likely to be different from what LUL claim is likely to be different from the truth.

Back to the CSDE question, I seem to recall reading that in the case of it failing, the driver was required to open his door, physically step onto the platform, before opening the train doors. Couldn't something similar be implemented on the Victoria in the short term - that drivers must stand on the same side of the cab as the platform to open the doors on that side? (I presume there are door buttons on the right hand side of the train, since some drivers sit there).

A leaflet with these points was left in the mess room at Seven Sisters recently. Points one and four had been scribbled out, summing up my sentiments and probably those of most drivers at the depot in one simple act.

Regarding CSDE, our performance in opening the doors on the correct side is better than most other lines. Of course CSDE should have been installed at the same time as it was on the rest of the network, but we are in the position we are in, and in my opinion the best way out is to concentrate on bringing the '09 stock into service. You might get the impression from some posts on this board that Victoria Line drivers are somehow not as good as those on other lines. This is simply not true. We had to pass the same selection tests as everyone else and had no idea at which of the depots we nominated we would be placed. Mini rant over.

As much as I like Glenroy, his situation alone is not worthy of a strike (yet).

That leaves us with the two points in the middle. It seems to my colleagues and I that what in the past might have been a retraining or dipping offense is now dealt with by dismissal. Whatever the RMT and Bob Crow might say, these two issues are the reasons why drivers are striking. ASLEF drivers (myself included) joined in because feelings are very strong about these and other local issues.

Bob Crow did not call this strike. Drivers did. I understand the frustration and inconvenience this causes to passengers but we do not decide to loose a day's pay without good reason.

Just the victoria? or is it exceptionally so?

Mr Campbell is very lucky to have a strong union and supportive colleagues. Down here in the bus industry although Unite itself does a good job we are now getting drivers sacked for minor offences (or occasionally no actual offence at all) and all the other drivers do (about 60% union in the depot) is shrug their shoulders and say "how sad". No solidarity at all.

So this seems to be all about management flexing their muscles and acting the hard man. Sometimes it seems that even where the event has proved to be not unsafe and also of benefit to passengers, the non-following of procedures is taken as sackable regardless of circumstances. This is far from being the first thread on the forum about this topic: although always previously in transport history exact following of procedures has been accompanied by 'sanctified common sense' this seems to be no longer acceptable to management.

And, as an aside, don't think that CCTV evidence can be conclusive. The facts as shown in the frames may be there, but two sides can interpret these facts in totally opposite ways - believe me: I know!!

How did they find out in the first place that something had happened?