On 2016\05\27 11:04, Recliner wrote:
Basil Jet wrote:
On 2016\05\27 09:51, d wrote:

TfL doesn't currently have a stunning
record on the chingford or enfield lines, can't see how its going to do much
better than Southern if it gets handed all those lines with the same sick
prone and indifferent staff.

Sick prone? What do you mean? Are you talking about the existing staff
taken on from the TOC or the new staff employed to enable the increased
staffing levels?

I suspect he's referring to SN's guards who are reported to be suddenly
suffering from a high level of "sickness".

http://www.itv.com/news/meridian/upd...d-by-sickness/

As TfL has a DOO policy on all its lines, these sickness-prone guards
presumably won't be needed if their lines are transferred to LO.

Ah, thanks.

On Fri, 27 May 2016 10:04:05 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
Basil Jet wrote:
On 2016\05\27 09:51, d wrote:

TfL doesn't currently have a stunning
record on the chingford or enfield lines, can't see how its going to do much
better than Southern if it gets handed all those lines with the same sick
prone and indifferent staff.

Sick prone? What do you mean? Are you talking about the existing staff
taken on from the TOC or the new staff employed to enable the increased
staffing levels?

I suspect he's referring to SN's guards who are reported to be suddenly
suffering from a high level of "sickness".

http://www.itv.com/news/meridian/upd...ces-disrupted-
y-sickness/

As TfL has a DOO policy on all its lines, these sickness-prone guards
presumably won't be needed if their lines are transferred to LO.

Just imagine the strikes. The entitled ****s at the front couldn't apparently
cope with an extra 2 carraiges on a train due to ******** "safety" reasons so
trying to get rid of guards will inevitably mean trouble.

--
Spud

Recliner writes:

As TfL has a DOO policy on all its lines, these sickness-prone guards
presumably won't be needed if their lines are transferred to LO.

How would TUPE affect this?

On Fri, 27 May 2016 11:32:50 +0100, Graham Murray
wrote:

Recliner writes:

As TfL has a DOO policy on all its lines, these sickness-prone guards
presumably won't be needed if their lines are transferred to LO.

How would TUPE affect this?

Assuming they're still in SN's employment and transferred, I assume
TfL would offer them different jobs (eg, revenue protection) on the
same terms. What happened to the former guards on the LO lines when
they went to DOO?

Recliner wrote:

On Fri, 27 May 2016 11:32:50 +0100, Graham Murray
wrote:

Recliner writes:

As TfL has a DOO policy on all its lines, these sickness-prone guards
presumably won't be needed if their lines are transferred to LO.

How would TUPE affect this?

Assuming they're still in SN's employment and transferred, I assume
TfL would offer them different jobs (eg, revenue protection) on the
same terms. What happened to the former guards on the LO lines when
they went to DOO?

I suspect that is not a problem as the Southern services inside London
are DOO already. The issues are on the Brighton line south of Gatwick



--
Mark

On 27/05/2016 11:32, Graham Murray wrote:
Recliner writes:

As TfL has a DOO policy on all its lines, these sickness-prone guards
presumably won't be needed if their lines are transferred to LO.

How would TUPE affect this?


Doesn't TUPE just specify that their employment and all service etc has
to continue to the new owner/company?

So you can still e.g. make staff redundant but they maintain all their
previous service and rights, and you can only make them redundant with
all the standard consultations etc.

You can't transfer staff to a new entity and lay them off immediately
with no compensation as they've only worked for "you" for a week or so.

On Fri, 27 May 2016 16:05:11 +0100
Paul Corfield wrote:
LOROL negotiated the removal of guards from several London Overground
services without strike action. Therefore things can be sorted with
the unions without the trains stopping running.

I guess we'll soon find out.

help them weather the industrial dispute. While you'd undoubtedly
love to see the unions destroyed I don't think it is the place of

Only the rail unions. They've proven numerous times that they're dinosaurs
whose sole purpose seems to be to block any change and blackmail operators
over pay.

On a more serious point growth on the TSGN network is at a very high
rate. There are long standing concerns about the effects of
overcrowding on trains and platforms and how the TOCs / Network Rail

Well if you add 2 carraiges there'll be less overcrowding on board.

in the face of huge overcrowding. I saw a photo the other day of the
in cab monitor display on a TSGN train which basically showed misty
images on each monitor. That's unacceptable and not safe. If that

Misty images would be dangerous on any train regardless of its length.

ASLEF to be in dispute at the same company these days. That they are
at TSGN suggests something is very seriously amiss. Oh and the

Tbh if you believed everything the unions said you'd think LU management
(for example) were spawn of the devil. You can only cry wolf so often before
you just become background noise and people stop listening.

passengers seem to hate TSGN's management with a passion.

I don't think anyone is happy with any TOCs in this country frankly.

--
Spud

"Graham Murray" wrote in message
...
Recliner writes:

As TfL has a DOO policy on all its lines, these sickness-prone guards
presumably won't be needed if their lines are transferred to LO.

How would TUPE affect this?


Rapid reorganisation under the Economic Technical and Organisational
exemption.

Followed by redundancy or redeployment, would be my guess.

James

On 27/05/2016 16:05, Paul Corfield wrote:

The ORR found
weaknesses in their approach to managing the platform / train
interface (PTI) when set against what LU typically does.

Is that not because LU basically leads the world on PTI, so anyone else
would be weaker? According to one report, when the ORR asked what SNCF
was doing in the PTI area, they found it doesn't do anything at all, not
even collecting statistics.

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

wrote in message ...


Well if you add 2 carraiges there'll be less overcrowding on board.


Not necessarily:
10 car class 442 has 692 seats.
12 car class 387 has 657 seats - these probably have more standing room
available than the 442s.

--
DAS