Poor transport links: any one else thinking of fleeing East Dulwich?

[rendelharris]

DulwichLondoner Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I remember Southeastern or another company that

> served Denmark Hill had a problem with

> understaffing around 2008-9, but nothing even

> remotely comparable to this.

>

> However, as far as I understand it, resorting to

> overtime is an arrangement which suits both

> parties: the company finds it cheaper than hiring

> and training new staff, while unions are happy

> because its members get paid more.

>

> This point seems unregulated - it evidently

> shouldn't.

I agree (shock). Running something as important as a railway and relying on the goodwill/desire/availability of staff to take overtime, rather than actually having enough staff to cover the timetable on regular roster, is a farce. In passing, it may seem a small point, but Southern lost quite a lot of goodwill amongst staff when last year they banned shift-switching (i.e. say you had a child which needed taking to the doctor, you could swap with a willing colleague), withdrew free staff carpark permits and free family railpasses for staff. Little things, you might say, but possibly inadvisable if relying on the goodwill of staff to fill overtime needs. Still, why should Govia care? They still picked up ?100M profit last year (along with ?20M in "emergency" funding from the government) despite running the five worst performing services in the country. Trebles all round! (but no trains)

[KidKruger]

"Presumably you then feel that the unions should be banned from withdrawing from overtime or taking strike action? You accuse the unions of having a bewildering sense of self-entitlement for working to rule to prevent what they see as detrimental changes, so the only conclusion is that your sense of self-entitlement leads you to believe that nobody should ever go on strike if it inconveniences you, doesn't it?"

You can presume what you want bro. Your extrapolations, however stupid they may be, are entirely your business - don't feel you have to lay them at my feet for (laughs) 'debate'.

Want to me to explain use of quote marks used above for a, what was it now, oh yeah, for a 'source' ?

L O L

[rendelharris]

Good answer, I always find writing LOL at the end of a post in which one's refused to address an argument really seals the point. Well done.

If you don't want people to respond to what you say, don't post. Job done. If you are going to post and accuse others of having "a bewildering sense of self-entitlement" then don't spit your dummy if people reply.

[KidKruger]

Yeah but you can't invent 'presumptions' (your quote BTW) on behalf of people old chap.

There's a BIG difference between putting words in other peoples' mouths to try and convince yourself you are 'the winner' (my quotes, no source I'm afraid) and the other person not wanting 'replies' (your quote).

L O L

[rendelharris]

Instead of trying to be clever (ironically your heavy-handed attempts at humour rather fall down as both the words you cite as quotes are words I didn't use, never mind) why not simply answer the simple question, which is as follows: you accuse the unions of having "a bewildering sense of self-entitlement" for taking industrial action. Do you believe that your entitlement to travel is more important than that, and if so do you believe the unions should be banned from striking?

If you can't, or don't want to, answer, no problem, just say so rather than indulging in the tiresomely leaden persiflage above.

[JoeLeg]

Honestly, KK, while I really hope the unions aren't returning to the bad old days in this matter, the only one I can see with a sense of self entitlement around here is you.

I'm very sceptical of a lot of the briefing that's gone on in the media against the unions. Southern has (rightly) taken a kicking in this so I'd be surprised if they aren't hitting back. Unions are notorious for not making life easy for themselves and make easy targets. I (personally, and with nothing to back it up save for my innate cynicism) suspect Southern are trying their hardest to paint the unions as the bad guys.

All that said, I (again personally, and with nothing to back it up) am struggling to see the issue with DOO, except for the point, which seems reasonable to me, that not every station is covered sufficiently by cameras for the driver to make a judgement about when to close the doors. Past that it seems fairly reasonable on short to medou commuter runs.

[KidKruger]

RH:"you accuse the unions of having "a bewildering sense of self-entitlement" for taking industrial action. Do you believe that your entitlement to travel is more important than that, and if so do you believe the unions should be banned from striking? "

Answer: I don't make ratings about who's more entitled than who, if you want to do that it's not my obligation to join in, just because you ask a question doesn't make it valid (or an obligation) to me, this is not an interrogation, you need to realise that. I think people who pay for goods or services have the right to them, that includes me, if that's defining self-entitled then there I stand. I've almost lost good work over this state of affairs and I do not appreciate the situation. I think when tactical strikes to 'control' / take power over an organisation's development in cases LIKE THIS (i.e. DOO) then the unions are playing-out a self-entitlement. Whether that's '>' or '<' than what I feel I'm entitled to I don't give a feck, it's not a fecking competition.

JL:"Honestly, KK, while I really hope the unions aren't returning to the bad old days in this matter, the only one I can see with a sense of self entitlement around here is you."

Answer: Fair enough. I think wanting what I've paid for is reasonable, but I accept there are many views on this.

[rendelharris]

KidKruger Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Answer: I don't make ratings about who's more

> entitled than who, if you want to do that it's not

> my obligation to join in

That's something of an absurd statement for someone who accuses the unions of having "a bewildering sense of self-entitlement." How have you not made a "rating" or judgement by saying that?

>I think people who pay for goods or services have the right to them

By definition then you must oppose any strike action which prevents you receiving the goods or services for which you've paid, ergo if you've paid for a season ticket you must believe that unions shouldn't strike because that prevents you enjoying your "right" to what you've paid for.

It's a defensible position - though obviously one on which we will not agree - just be honest about it.

[KidKruger]

No-one's being dishonest RH and you're entitled to your view, so enjoy it.

Just because you call something is absurd or you attempt to draw definitions doesn't make your position particularly valid, that's just your way of going about things.

Nothing you've said on the matter convinces me otherwise, please do carry on, I'm here to be swayed but I haven't seen the content yet.

If people strike just to have control over the DOO matter then they're out of order, but I've covered that already, the unions have messed with thousands of commuters and that is not OK. Good luck.

[traveler2]

7.09 to LB cancelled. Will be late to interview. Fantastic. I have no sympathy for the wan-ers.

[KalamityKel]

traveler2 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> 7.09 to LB cancelled. Will be late to interview.

> Fantastic. I have no sympathy for the wan-ers.

Maybe I was brought up differently...You should always plan alternative travel for any possibility AND allow for extra time to travel.

Why do people insist on running around at the last minute for everything in life?

[rendelharris]

(ETA in reply to Kid Kruger)

I have no idea of the rights and wrongs of the DOO debate, any more than I daresay you do - although I see today that the Association of British Commuters has unearthed a report commissioned by the rail industry, "On Track For 2020? The Future Of Accessible Rail Travel" which specifically recommended not having driver only trains because of the impact on elderly and disabled passengers wishing to board/alight at unstaffed stations (e.g. East Dulwich for a lot of the time, it seems). This report has not been released despite having been received two years ago.

On the face of it DOO would not seem to be a problem, given that it operates elsewhere, providing a guard is retained to assist elderly and disabled passengers, help those who are unwell etc etc. However, the unions suspect, and given Southern's single-minded pursuit of profit above all else one can't blame them, that this is merely a precursor to making trains single person operated in the near future.

The terms of the union action also need to be clear: they are not striking, they are simply refusing to take up offered overtime as any employee has a right to do. If Southern weren't running their network at 80% of the required staffing level - in order to save money, i.e. enhance profits - they would be able to cover the hours required. Perhaps, as also noted above, if they hadn't introduced a series of penny pinching - again, profit enhancing - measures to the detriment of their staff they would now have more goodwill. Remember, this is a company which made ?100M profit last year, whose boss was paid ?2.2M in 2015 and ?1.4M last year. If they'd invested some of your hard-earned ticket money in proper staffing levels, the cancellations wouldn't be necessary.

It's worth noting also that in refusing overtime union members are doing themselves out of hundreds and hundreds of pounds a week in wages, which doesn't quite sit with the lazy bastards out for money narrative peddled in certain quarters. Nor does the "unions trying to get power" argument hold water - as someone noted above, ASLEF actually recommended that its members accept a deal offered by Southern but they - the workers on the ground, who one presumes are well placed to know the realities of the situation - rejected it. Now, they may be right or wrong, but none of this fits with the portrayal of them "messing about" commuters for the hell of it.

[DulwichLondoner]

KalamityKel Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> traveler2 Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > 7.09 to LB cancelled. Will be late to

> interview.

> > Fantastic. I have no sympathy for the wan-ers.

>

> Maybe I was brought up differently...You should

> always plan alternative travel for any possibility

> AND allow for extra time to travel.

> Why do people insist on running around at the last

> minute for everything in life?

You crack me up, mate. Really. Big time.

This morning I passed by the East Dulwich train station at 8.05. The 8.30 was cancelled. The next train to London Bridge was the 9.30.

Did your mum bring you up to anticipate an 85-minute wait for a train service that used to run every 10 minutes or so? Yes, extra time. Yes, the odd inconvenience. But 85 f****** minutes?

Please, please name ONE example of a major city in the developed world where anything even only remotely comparable is allowed to happen for such a prolonged period of time. Not even in broke Athens, scandal-ridden Rome or strike-prone Paris!

May I ask if you commute, where to, and if you have children? This may come as a shock to you, but those of us who have been so irresponsible to reproduce and are not rich enough to afford 24/7 "help" cannot really leave one hour earlier for work, because, you know, who would take our children to nursery or school?

[uncleglen]

The Unions prop up the Labour Party. It is in the interests of the Labour Party to cause as much misery on the front line i.e. to the general public when they are in opposition. Therefore the public services are used as a political football when Labour is in opposition.

The railway system is privatised but the Labour Party want it to go back into public ownership so again it is in the interests of the Labour Party to get its Unions to cause more and more misery for the customer.

No-one is made to do overtime but it suits them to earn the extra money- the behaviour is akin to 'withdrawal of goodwill' that we operated in schools some years ago where teachers refused to do any task that was not strictly laid down in the job- i.e. helping students at lunchtime, breaktime after school, sports clubs, etc- the difference being that teachers were NEVER paid for it.

Preventing people from getting to their occupations is undermining the whole of society- but then that is what this bunch of treacherous lefties is all about imvho

[rendelharris]

Drivel from start to finish.

[JohnL]

The Large corrupt businesses prop up the Conservative Party. It is in the interests of the Conservative Party to cause as much misery on the front line i.e. to the general public when they are in Government. Therefore the NHS are used as a political football when Conservatives are in Government.

The NHS is public owned but the Conservative Party want it to into private ownership so again it is in the interests of the Conservative Party to get its minister of health (Jeremy C**t) to cause more and more misery for the patients.

etc. etc.

[Alan Medic]

KalamityKel Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> traveler2 Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > 7.09 to LB cancelled. Will be late to

> interview.

> > Fantastic. I have no sympathy for the wan-ers.

>

> Maybe I was brought up differently...You should

> always plan alternative travel for any possibility

> AND allow for extra time to travel.

> Why do people insist on running around at the last

> minute for everything in life?

Your name does not match your disposition Kalamity

[JohnL]

KalamityKel Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> traveler2 Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > 7.09 to LB cancelled. Will be late to

> interview.

> > Fantastic. I have no sympathy for the wan-ers.

>

> Maybe I was brought up differently...You should

> always plan alternative travel for any possibility

> AND allow for extra time to travel.

> Why do people insist on running around at the last

> minute for everything in life?

Just in Time philosophy - otherwise you are wasting time of course a really important date is different.

The guy sitting next to me at work often says "Just to Late"

[traveler2]

I'm going to change my name to "late traveler2" thanks to southern fail.

[rendelharris]

JohnL Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Just in Time philosophy - otherwise you are

> wasting time of course a really important date is

> different.

>

> The guy sitting next to me at work often says

> "Just to Late"

In my brief and inglorious time as a motorcycle courier, many years ago, we had a motto always wheeled out to exasperated clients, controllers etc: "Better late in this world than early in the next."