|
|
Post by banana99 on Sept 14, 2017 0:18:40 GMT
you would have a extra day to live and not work cant see how working extra hour or 2 a day would cancel your personal life its not like that its working a 12 hour day like some jobs Trust me, it would, the things I do start from around 15.30, there is no way I would be able to make these mon-fri on increased hours mon-fri, especially when I have the opportunity to finish by 10.30am a number of days on 5 day week Lollipop Man ?  |
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on Oct 12, 2017 8:47:17 GMT
RMT were never really in favour of it maybe as can't get similar deal for stations they balloted there T/op members before last pay deal to see wether to persue it was a close call 52 percent in favour if I recall I think ta more to do with breaking of driving perameters and pursuit of dropping weekly hours, as it stands, the trial doesn't deal with these |
|
|
|
Post by nig on Oct 15, 2017 19:49:44 GMT
RMT were never really in favour of it maybe as can't get similar deal for stations they balloted there T/op members before last pay deal to see wether to persue it was a close call 52 percent in favour if I recall I think ta more to do with breaking of driving perameters and pursuit of dropping weekly hours, as it stands, the trial doesn't deal with these London Underground is willing to do a trial of a four day, 36 hour week - for volunteers only - in two depots; to establish if it is possible to implement safely, as well as being cost effective and popular with drivers. The framework agreement will need to change only for those drivers who volunteer – it will remain unchanged for all others. The company has said that the working day needs to be at least 10 hours, and driving time needs to be increased to at least 4 hours and 45 minutes. This will be subject to further negotiation and will clearly suit some drivers, but not others. Once members have had their say on this matter we will continue with detailed negotiations and try to get into a position where we have a whole package on pay and Night Tube. Only at that stage will we ask you to vote on whether to accept the entire offer. Your ballot papers for this referendum will arrive shortly. Please ensure your voice is heard. It was a ballot for the trail exactly how it was trialled and to be fair how i would want to work it although new agreement has come in where 3 Drivers from each depot can work a 4 day week on reduced hours |
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on Oct 17, 2017 10:29:39 GMT
I think ta more to do with breaking of driving perameters and pursuit of dropping weekly hours, as it stands, the trial doesn't deal with these London Underground is willing to do a trial of a four day, 36 hour week - for volunteers only - in two depots; to establish if it is possible to implement safely, as well as being cost effective and popular with drivers. The framework agreement will need to change only for those drivers who volunteer – it will remain unchanged for all others. The company has said that the working day needs to be at least 10 hours, and driving time needs to be increased to at least 4 hours and 45 minutes. This will be subject to further negotiation and will clearly suit some drivers, but not others. Once members have had their say on this matter we will continue with detailed negotiations and try to get into a position where we have a whole package on pay and Night Tube. Only at that stage will we ask you to vote on whether to accept the entire offer. Your ballot papers for this referendum will arrive shortly. Please ensure your voice is heard. It was a ballot for the trail exactly how it was trialled and to be fair how i would want to work it although new agreement has come in where 3 Drivers from each depot can work a 4 day week on reduced hours Unfortunately, as an old senior rep, too much experience of how the machinery cogs turn kicked my naivety into touch many years ago. We knew what the 4 day week entailed when you went down certain routes and nearly all were detrimental to drivers, to both those on 4 & 5 day week, the current calculus being one. The whole 'London Underground is willing to do a trial' thing is just very sinister to me, knowing how negotiations have gone since 2004, as it was the company always wanting to trial while the unions would put it to branch where it'd be kicked into touch by both unions. It's a new thing in as much as being implemented, but it most certainly ISN'T a new thing as far as negotiations for it. I really do do wish that I was ignorant to all the shenanigans and agendas of the TFC reps, I'd be a lot less grisly if I was. Still, I plan to be gone within 5 yrs, the way company is going ain't good for an experienced heart, feels very dystopian to me, our TU creating an environment which will ultimately make it redundant, need to bow out 😔 Anyway, on a lighter note, a George 'Dubya' golfing moment, did you know I was the first t/op to drive a 96s from North Greenwich - Waterloo under its own steam in 1999 😂😂😂 |
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on Oct 17, 2017 10:42:10 GMT
Here's another, the outer home approaching North Greenwich from Canning Town wasn't set a safe braking distance under full loading of a 96s. During the loading phase of ops, EVERY train that saw the yellow aspect on the repeater had a SPAD. At the same time, approaching London Bridge EB, home signal was round slight bend so needed a repeater, trouble was, the repeater was timed, it wasn't constantly showing an aspect (something to do with money saving), however it was timed to come on AFTER the driver came into sighting distance of the associated signal. The mad thing being, if signal was green, it showed continuous on repeater, the moment it was red, the repeater aspect dropped out.
It took a good two years after opening for the company to agree to a working signal sighting group on jube and rectify issues, with all recorded SPADs on those signals being scrubbed. As a result, we now have combine wide signal sighting committees.s
During test train working between Stratford-North Greenwich, I was once refused access back onto my own train by a member of station staff at Stratford who is now a driver at Leytonstone and a forum member here 😀
|
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Oct 17, 2017 11:00:14 GMT
During test train working between Stratford-North Greenwich, I was once refused access back onto my own train by a member of station staff at Stratford who is now a driver at Leytonstone and a forum member here 😀 That must have been when the window over Plat. 13 shattered and there was still a large chunk of glass hanging precariously in the frame. The station supervisor sent out a cleaner to sweep up the broken glass on the floor until I pointed out that it could come down on him any time. Oh how I miss being a stations H&S Rep............not. |
|
|
|
Post by principlesdesigner on Oct 17, 2017 11:01:12 GMT
IIRC the reason for LOB EB repeater being "timed" was that it was visible too early and would impede headway when at caution, so was set to "pop-up" when at caution. This was later modified so that it always "popped-up" as the drivers got used to creeping if they couldn't see it! The problem with signal sighting in the past is that the sighting point is calculated, and if this is not then proved to be valid for all circumstances, the problems which drainrat reports can arise.
|
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on Oct 17, 2017 19:27:26 GMT
During test train working between Stratford-North Greenwich, I was once refused access back onto my own train by a member of station staff at Stratford who is now a driver at Leytonstone and a forum member here 😀 That must have been when the window over Plat. 13 shattered and there was still a large chunk of glass hanging precariously in the frame. The station supervisor sent out a cleaner to sweep up the broken glass on the floor until I pointed out that it could come down on him any time. Oh how I miss being a stations H&S Rep............not. No, it was when the train side of jube platforms were caged off, I pulled into platform 13 and needed toilet, when it was old cabin in car park and was stopped getting back on train after I'd finished. The young posh lad with the perm hairstyle just used to say "are you sure you're the driver and not just wanting a go on the train?", never really knew if he was messing around or not 😉 |
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on Oct 17, 2017 20:44:23 GMT
IIRC the reason for LOB EB repeater being "timed" was that it was visible too early and would impede headway when at caution, so was set to "pop-up" when at caution. This was later modified so that it always "popped-up" as the drivers got used to creeping if they couldn't see it! The problem with signal sighting in the past is that the sighting point is calculated, and if this is not then proved to be valid for all circumstances, the problems which drainrat reports can arise. Yes, first module of the old rules and regs course introduced to drivers the four factors of signal placement: speed of the fastest train, weight of the heaviest train, gradient, and for the life of me I cannot remember the fourth, but I think it was braking capacity. The first that was raised by test train ops for the JLE was that it appeared - rightly or wrongly - a lot of calculations were made without consideration of the above, which was proved at the North Greenwich outer home signal, however, the problem wasn't the placement of the outer home, it was the distance of the repeater from the outer home. As was the case with the attitude at the time, there was a reluctance to admit to getting it wrong, so the adaptations drivers made to deal with it was to approach the repeater at slower speeds until they saw the repeater aspect, thus impeding head ways through North Greenwich, the main impact being the affect on trains per hour through Canary Wharf WB, thus not meeting the agreements made with Canary Wharf PLC, which I believe was ultimately the reason why the repeater was repositioned and not because of the increased risk of a SPAD. As a member of signal sighting from 2004-2009, I understand that the technical application doesn't always fit hand in glove with the practical running. Before the setting up of the signal sighting on the jube, there was very much a mindset that the technical plans were infallible, in spite of the contradictions that practical running threw up, t/ops were left to deal with the impracticalities. It took a while for the company to realise that drivers can provide insightful feedback on signal sighting, but now we have had a fair number of signals repositioned as a result of driver involvement. Seems a no brainer now, but it took a lot of fighting to get to that stage. Interesting point, one of the points in the ballot of the safety strikes of 2001 was setting up signal sighting committees, strangely the good old Evening Standard reported it as being over the lack of tea making facilities, and the travelling public do like to be spoon fed media 'truths' |
|
|
|
Post by principlesdesigner on Oct 18, 2017 8:40:54 GMT
You are correct with braking rate!
|
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on Oct 18, 2017 8:46:15 GMT
Phew, was staking my reputation on that one 😓
|
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Oct 18, 2017 9:34:50 GMT
That must have been when the window over Plat. 13 shattered and there was still a large chunk of glass hanging precariously in the frame. The station supervisor sent out a cleaner to sweep up the broken glass on the floor until I pointed out that it could come down on him any time. Oh how I miss being a stations H&S Rep............not. No, it was when the train side of jube platforms were caged off, I pulled into platform 13 and needed toilet, when it was old cabin in car park and was stopped getting back on train after I'd finished. The young posh lad with the perm hairstyle just used to say "are you sure you're the driver and not just wanting a go on the train?", never really knew if he was messing around or not 😉 We called him "Sideshow Bob" |
|
|
|
Post by whistlekiller2000 on Oct 18, 2017 10:45:04 GMT
No, it was when the train side of jube platforms were caged off, I pulled into platform 13 and needed toilet, when it was old cabin in car park and was stopped getting back on train after I'd finished. The young posh lad with the perm hairstyle just used to say "are you sure you're the driver and not just wanting a go on the train?", never really knew if he was messing around or not 😉 We called him "Sideshow Bob" That made me spit out my coffee. There's a bloke in our local pub called that for exactly the same reason.  |
|
rincew1nd
Administrator
Junior Under-wizzard of quiz
Posts: 10,286 
|
Post by rincew1nd on Oct 18, 2017 11:06:51 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on Oct 19, 2017 9:39:44 GMT
No, it was when the train side of jube platforms were caged off, I pulled into platform 13 and needed toilet, when it was old cabin in car park and was stopped getting back on train after I'd finished. The young posh lad with the perm hairstyle just used to say "are you sure you're the driver and not just wanting a go on the train?", never really knew if he was messing around or not 😉 We called him "Sideshow Bob" Haha, I always imagined him doing the job as a bit of fun as he went back to his huge stately home in the evening to check up on the accumulation of his trust funds. Always had a smile though |
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on Oct 19, 2017 16:42:32 GMT
So the ballot return was poor, not much of a mandate, don't think the promises of overtime working gained momentum 😬
|
|
|
|
Post by nig on Jan 17, 2018 8:48:48 GMT
RMT Upfront: pull the plug on compressed working week ... well thats the end of that then ....
|
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Jan 17, 2018 12:32:30 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Jan 17, 2018 12:34:56 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by nig on Jan 18, 2018 1:38:55 GMT
Very long term can't see that happening anytime within the next 15 years to have same pay and conditions would mean for every 10 ish drivers working 4 hours less they would need to employ another driver .. why can't they let people that want to work 4 day week work it could be in on the next timetable change .. |
|
