Re: industrial action by cityrail train guards - 22 july

["Exnarc" <gwrly@netspace.net.au>]

<zambuck@my-deja.com> wrote in message 7ook4t$rra$1@nnrp1.deja.com">news:7ook4t$rra$1@nnrp1.deja.com...
> In article <7oo6ef$2vk4$1@otis.netspace.net.au>,
>   "Exnarc" <gwrly@netspace.net.au> wrote:
> >
> > David Johnson <trainman@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
> > 37AD0521.8E3E7B45@ozemail.com.au">news:37AD0521.8E3E7B45@ozemail.com.au...
> > > zambuck@my-deja.com wrote:
> > >
> > > > In article <37AAFEB9.B71F294F@ozemail.com.au>,
> > > >   trainman@ozemail.com.au wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > The guards job will not be changed until at least 2003.  I can
> see DOO
> > > > during off
> > > > > peaks with 4 car trains, but not during peak times.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > David Johnson
> > > > > trainman@ozemail.com.au
> > > > > http://www.ozemail.com.au/~trainman/
> > > > >
> > > > > I heard something similar, with the tangara as DOO due to the
> coupling
> > > > procedure and the older type will remain coupled as 8cars for peak
> hours
> > > > and specials.  Yet the issue of safety or a proactive system in
> health
> > > > and safety remains let out of the equation.  The fight on lowering
> > > > standards to be 'competitive'  (to what?) is killing jobs
> > > > paul hayes, (public transport workers rank & file)
> > >
> > > The question is, what is the RTBU doing to save our jobs?
> > >
> > > --
> > > David Johnson
> > > trainman@ozemail.com.au
> > > http://www.ozemail.com.au/~trainman/
> > >
> > >
> > David,
> >
> > I agree, however there is an onus on the members to contribute!!!
> >
> > The Melbourne system operates fine without guards, (well its no worse
> than
> > with them).
> >
> > For the record, I am not advicating the removal of guards, thats
> something
> > for management in NSW to decide.
> >
> > What I am suggesting is: The Melbourne guards were their own worst
> enemies,
> > they point blank refused to accept that they would have to need other
> > responsibilities to shore up their jobs.
> >
> > They refused to sell or check tickets, they refused to roam (I must
> admit I
> > wouldn't like to do that in the Off Peak evenings), in the end they
> refused
> > to take responsibility for parcels, the list goes on.
> >
> > If Sydney is to defy the odds they will need to study the mistakes of
> > others, Perth, Adelaide, Melbourne, Brisbane?? are all DOO. The last
> thing
> > I, as a worker like to see is that other workers loose their jobs, but
> in
> > these days of so called global economics the main drive by management
> (both
> > Government and Private) is to cut costs, you have got to sell yourself
> to
> > justify your job. Promises and other statements that guards will be
> around
> > for 10 or 20 years are rubbish if you can't justify your right to be
> there.
> >
> > That bet of a $1000 sounds almost inviting<g>
> >
> > Bob.
> >
> > Bob,
> This was the same position put on station staff by management.  To save
> your job you must have that many duties to perform which would in
> actual working be illogical.  I was shown the station master duties, it
> was nearly as thick as the white pages.  It was nonsensequal.
>
> I disagree with your comments that employees have no choice but to take
> on extra duties just to continue the work they are now performing.  It
> comes down to reducing quality of service to be competitive.  A prime
> example of this is the hospitals.  Many services were removed, not
> because they were unjustified, but because their removal made profit.
> These nurses thought their jobs were safe.   As many of the public
> utilised the service, like the trains.
>
> I agree that unionists need to start to ask many questions about the
> role of their union.
>
> Paul Hayes
> Public Transport Workers
> Rank & File.
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Share what you know. Learn what you don't.

I would suggest to you that in Melbourne there has been no reduction in the
quality of service because the guards have gone, to the contrary, there has
probably been an improvement in the quality of service in some ways.

The real facts are, to many unionists in the rail industry thought they had
jobs for life, after all, thats what they were told when they started.

In reality those who were prepared to adopt change in the majority of cases
kept their jobs albeit they were much different jobs than when they joined
and there weren't as many, but they were jobs.

The best example of this (apart from Drivers) would be shunters, the
shunters in the Melbourne Yard put every obstical they could in the way of
management, bans for the sake of bans, you name it. The result, they closed
the Melbourne Yard and moved everything out to Tottenham (long before
Melbourne Yard was projected as a sporting complex), the railways went out
of their way to avoid putting anythink into Melbourne.

It was only the advent of privatisation that has threatened the Tottenham
shunters.

People can bury your heads in the sand thinking they can carry on the same
as before, but by the time they look up they will find that the world has
passed them by.

We all in the rail industry hate the way things have turned out, but the
only survivers in the long run will be those who are prepared to embrace
change.

As for the union letting the membership down, maybe this is true? But may I
also suggest that unions are not a group of officials sitting in distant
offices, they are a collective of people, "The membership" The best way to
get something done is to do it yourself, ie: Don't remain a part of the rank
and file (as honourable as that may be) run for office. Change things!!!!
Shake them up if your think your not being represented.

Bob.