|
Post by GentlemanJim on Nov 23, 2013 13:27:48 GMT
I've put this here as I think it's a important development for LU staff unlike 24 hour running at weekends which is completely stupid as Engineering Hours are scarce enough. I'd like to know what kind of numpty comes up with some of these grade names....... Customer Service AGENT!!!! Attachments:
|
|
drico
Station Inspector
Thank you driver, off clips.
Posts: 202
|
Post by drico on Nov 23, 2013 17:59:31 GMT
Any information on what the new grades will be paid ?
As for the grade names it's not new on the Underground to have new job titles every ten years or so.
|
|
|
Post by GentlemanJim on Nov 23, 2013 19:15:17 GMT
Out with the old names and in with the new when there's cuts to grades. When I was a Line Controller we had several titles over 18 months finally settling on Service Controller.
I understand that protection of earnings will be 3 years should it come to that. Strange thing is LU have said 'there will be no compulsory redundancies' but if you look at the figures there's about 1000 less after the re-grading, I think they might be banking on VS to clear out the surplus.
|
|
|
Post by railtechnician on Nov 24, 2013 12:27:30 GMT
Out with the old names and in with the new when there's cuts to grades. When I was a Line Controller we had several titles over 18 months finally settling on Service Controller. I understand that protection of earnings will be 3 years should it come to that. Strange thing is LU have said 'there will be no compulsory redundancies' but if you look at the figures there's about 1000 less after the re-grading, I think they might be banking on VS to clear out the surplus. Perhaps and perhaps not! From the looks of it there will be great upheaval and presumably plenty of new rostering to match and that often results in people voting with their feet. I'm surprised that Centurions will not be regraded as Area Managers and GSMs as Area Supervisors which would be more in keeping with the idea of everyone working in a 'customer service' environment. I wonder how much the 'brainstormers' are paid to sit around all day reinventing the wheel? I would not be surprised if regrading resulted in lower wages which AFAIR is what happened when line controllers were regraded in the 1980s. Further tightening of sickness, absence and leave rules in new contracts would also aid natural wastage over time and coupled with a zero recruitment policy could lead to the correct complement of staff without redundancy or VS. Just because VS has been available in past years there is no guarantee that it will remain so in the future especially in tough economic times. I would expect a lot of supervisory grades to end up with protected earnings as opposed to redundancy or VS.
|
|
|
Post by deansullivan on Nov 24, 2013 12:49:35 GMT
I have read the complete document from which this graph is part of. Frankly I am shocked by the extent of the changes. I fully accept that the railway needs to modernise in what is a difficult financial environment. But the railway is being used more intensively and predictions are that passenger use will continue to rise. This is not the time to be cutting staff numbers, especially as demands on the network continue to increase.
As someone who has worked as a DSM on both the Northern & Central lines, I am saddened to see the GSM & DSM grade disappear. My career path left LUL in 2000, but I am still in contact with a number of former colleagues and I am aware of the work pressures they currently face. I saw my old job as managing staff, being on hand to help in emergencies, and maintain a visible presence. It was my mantra to remain visible during the peak, be it on the gateline or on a platform. When I was on duty I never missed a peak hour as I felt it reassured our customers that they were getting value for money. I am pleased to see that they are moving back to this approach.
But on recent visits to my old colleagues they seem to be bogged down with head office generated paperwork which denies them the opportunity to get out and about on their patch. I took my occasional role as Acting GSM as a chore for the very reason that I did not wish to be stuck in an office. It seems that the DSMs are acting as GSMs did a decade back.
The document does hint that they will double the number of Station Groups by increasing the number to 96. This would seem to take LUL back to the changes made post Fennell Report when the Centurion concept was first implemented. This also reverses the recent move towards Super Groups. But to be honest I suspect that centralisation is a better way forward than what is being currently proposed as it helps focus the relevant skills where they are needed and centralise the Groups admin functions. This if handled correctly and coupled with a focus on core ‘essential’ activities would free up managers time to get out and about on the railway.
So I am clearly all for freeing up managers to ‘walk the walk’. And as I said above, part of that should be to centralise the admin functions, not disperse those skills thinly over a wider area. I would be hardly surprised if over the next decade we see those 96 groups steadily decline as one by one they are merged to reform the Super Groups.
The document which is mainly for discussion and I suspect like Company plan in the early 90’s the actual outcome will be different. But its does state that DSMs (and a few other grades) will be offered severance as the “your current job type does not continue in the organisation”. That’s a terrible phrase to use! The danger here is that those with the skills to take the railway forward will see this as an opportunity to jump ship and pursue another career path where perhaps they might feel better valued.
|
|
|
Post by deansullivan on Nov 24, 2013 13:07:20 GMT
I should perhaps add that in the mid 90’s at the age of about 37, I applied for VS. They asked for a reason as to why I felt I was suitable for VS and I said “I want to run my own bus company”. The reply was “So - seriously what is your reason for wanting VS?”. I was of course turned down!
|
|
|
Post by Nortube on Nov 24, 2013 14:25:02 GMT
Area Manager? - it looks like they've run out of names and are recycling old ones!
Customer Service Manager Customer Service Team Manager Customer Service Supervisor Customer Service Agent
So, it looks like their meeting with the tesco director etc. has paid dividends, staff positions are like a supermarket. There again, perhaps it all fits in with their great plan for empty ticket offices and staff "flexibility". They're already trying out Asda order collections at stations, and are introducing Amazon collection points at stations. Perhaps that's the way things are going. Station staff will be busy with other things and the railway will be a minor part of what they do. Imagine the scenario:
Passenger - "can you help me?, I've got problems with my Osyter card" LU staff - "Sorry, you'll have to wait. I'm sorting out this lady's Asda order, then I've got to look for that person's Amazon order that seems to have gone missing and then I've got three people waiting for coffee that I have to serve first"!
As long as the stations don't follow tesco's example and start to go downhill rapidly.
|
|
|
Post by deansullivan on Nov 24, 2013 15:02:38 GMT
A Parcels service is nothing new! They flourished on the mainline railways until the late 1920's, when decline set in due to competition with the roads. Red Star Parcels was finally wound up (I think) in 1991. Additionally when the City & South London first opened, they operated their own postal service.
I am not advocating of course, that we return to that!
|
|
|
Post by railtechnician on Nov 24, 2013 21:07:06 GMT
I should perhaps add that in the mid 90’s at the age of about 37, I applied for VS. They asked for a reason as to why I felt I was suitable for VS and I said “I want to run my own bus company”. The reply was “So - seriously what is your reason for wanting VS?”. I was of course turned down! I was also turned down for VS in 1992 at the age of 39 because I was 'too valuable a supervisor' to let go, however, I ended up with three years protected earnings and served another 13 years, albeit at a lower grade, before taking early retirement. I never regretted not challenging the VS refusal and enjoyed the remainder of my service gaining new skills and facing new challenges.
|
|
drico
Station Inspector
Thank you driver, off clips.
Posts: 202
|
Post by drico on Nov 25, 2013 7:03:48 GMT
First stations people to leave on Voluntary Severance won't go until about February 2015. Transition to the new ways of running stations will completed in late 2015.
|
|
|
Post by railtechnician on Nov 25, 2013 15:35:25 GMT
Area Manager? - it looks like they've run out of names and are recycling old ones! Customer Service Manager Customer Service Team Manager Customer Service Supervisor Customer Service Agent So, it looks like their meeting with the tesco director etc. has paid dividends, staff positions are like a supermarket. There again, perhaps it all fits in with their great plan for empty ticket offices and staff "flexibility". They're already trying out Asda order collections at stations, and are introducing Amazon collection points at stations. Perhaps that's the way things are going. Station staff will be busy with other things and the railway will be a minor part of what they do. Imagine the scenario: Passenger - "can you help me?, I've got problems with my Osyter card" LU staff - "Sorry, you'll have to wait. I'm sorting out this lady's Asda order, then I've got to look for that person's Amazon order that seems to have gone missing and then I've got three people waiting for coffee that I have to serve first"! As long as the stations don't follow tesco's example and start to go downhill rapidly. Actually transporting goods would be much easier than transporting people as goods generally don't have a mind of their own and have their travel billed, they also don't have eyes, ears, sensitive stomachs, heart attacks etc. So here's a radical solution to London's commuter problems, ban all road traffic in the capital except for buses, local haulage and essential service vehicles, build freight centres at the extremities of the system to handle transfer of freight from road to tube, carry all people in the city by bus on nice empty roads. Do away with taxis and parking wardens but have more police on the streets to ensure buses can run to time and local hauliers don't take liberties with loading/unloading at stations. I can think of plenty of interesting and different names for LU operational staff, e.g. haulage manager, parcel control operative, goods inward technician, goods out director, system controller etc
|
|
|
Post by hellocontrol on Nov 26, 2013 11:34:00 GMT
Who remembers Action Stations? The name used for what became DSM under company plan was Station Services Manager and just like has been said names change many times over the years that I worked for them.
|
|
|
Post by railtechnician on Nov 27, 2013 2:47:59 GMT
Who remembers Action Stations? The name used for what became DSM under company plan was Station Services Manager and just like has been said names change many times over the years that I worked for them. Yep I recall Action Stations, DSMs what a disaster! Most of the ones that I came into contact with were simply not railwaymen having come straight into LU from without. From the late 1980s (about 1986-7) onward LU seemed to care less and less about knowledge and experience in the job when it came to filling the new management grades and DSMs stuck out like sore thumbs when hoards were taken on. My recollection is that DSMs were supposed to be an interim management grade to see through the changes of the Company Plan and ideally should have done themselves out of a job within two years. As we all know LT/LU has become an ever bigger dinosaur over the decades as the 'empire builders' have become ever greedier making the organisation a much less efficient 'corporate' than it might otherwise be. It would be interesting to see what the ratio of frontline staff is to the whole 'work' (I mean everyone from the top down) force. On engineering back in the very late 1980s we calculated that every worker (proper frontline staff) was carrying something like 20 managers, office staff and other support staff. AFAIR operations was not on a par then but I wouldn't be surprised to learn that since then it has swelled such that station supervisors, CSAs, drivers are each carrying similar numbers of others.
|
|
|
Post by deansullivan on Nov 27, 2013 13:33:59 GMT
I think a lot of that rumor mongering about the DSM grade being temporary, was put about by the Unions who objected to the regrade. Like all staff we had proper contracts of employment and continuation of employment. I would not have taken the role, if I thought it was anything less.
However I accept that the way in which the original DSM concept was received was as you say, consisted of some staff who had little knowledge of the operational railway. Part of the reason for this was perhaps the speed it was all put together and fact that there was no formal Manager training.
The first DSM teams consisted where possible of four managers. Normally two were drawn from the operational side of the railway and two from either the ticket office or some other discipline. In many cases the first teams consisted of assimilated SMs (Station Managers), who would have had at least two decades experience on the railway.
The plan was to encompass as many skills as possible within the team and hope that we were able to learn off each other’s experiences. In some cases this worked well, but often the experiences imparted might not have been the sort of thing the railway really wanted to perpetuate at that time.
I was first allocated to Golders Green. The Group consisted of four stations and our team consisted of a former Station Foreman, a former Chief Booking Clerk, an assimilated SM and myself. The former SF and myself were considered the hard men who went out and tackled station staff issues. The other two had the soft skills to mop it all up afterwards!
We really had no framework in which to work to. The word Manager was frequently used when you questioned your role. But being someone who could find worthwhile work, I soon developed a number things to be getting on with.
I was lucky in having worked at the Railway Training Centre (RTC) in Wood Lane for a brief time prior to my appointment as a DSM. Amongst other things I set about sorting out refresher training for the station staff. However just as I got into my stride and much to my disappointment I was quickly moved to Tottenham Court Road, a station which had I have been offered in the first place I would have declined and stuck at RTC. However that’s all in past.
Looking back, I like railtechnician felt that LUL should have been managed by Railwaymen. The (todays equivalent of the) Managing Director had made their way through the grades. At the time I joined London Transport it was one of the Cope brothers (not sure if it was Charlie or John) who was at the helm, who although a slightly grumpy character had the credibility of someone who had worked through the grades from Box Boy to Head of Operations. That gave me a degree of comfort as I could see that LUL trained and promoted its own staff, and clearly it was possible to reach the heady heights of senior management if you had the ability to do so. I also bemoaned the fact that shortly after the DSM grade was created, LUL started recruiting managers from outside, particularly University Students with no real knowledge or interest in the railway. I remember one senior colleague telling me that “running the railway was no different to running a baked bean factory”. I strongly disagreed.
However, and this is where I do a pretty rapid about turn. Over the years LUL had a promotional system you could perhaps liken to inbreeding. The company was adverse to change and perhaps supported that by having an incredibly long promotional process that ensured that no-one with less than couple of decades of seniority (I will avoid using the word experience) made it to Manager. This meant that the people who could have potentially developed positive change would have either lost interest over the years or left the company. You could also argue that the old SM’s, although having the title ‘manager’ had pretty much little or no influence over running the company.
Kings Cross was the big wake up call. The company needed to find staff who were keen to develop the business and challenge the age old restrictions that had been handed down from father to son. Bringing about the DSM/DTM/DMT grades gave them a good opportunity to do this. Although I do not support the Baked Bean analogy, the company is a £Multi-Million business like any other and needs a wide diverse range of skills from its workforce. Just pooling all these staff from one source would not have enabled LUL to make the significant change that needed to be made at that time.
Painful as it was (and I don’t agree with all of it), but from the outside it needed to happen. Looking back at that time I could not support the fact that colleagues fresh from University were in charge of running the railway. But like an athlete, these guys and girls had trained for a higher level of management that I could ever attain and I suppose I now accept that as fact.
After all in a race you’re better off supporting Usain Bolt, than some fat bloke like me who spends too long in McDonalds!
|
|
|
Post by railtechnician on Nov 28, 2013 20:59:01 GMT
I have seen the management arguments from both sides and will never accept that someone with a degree or three in his/her back pocket and no experience or working knowledge of the railway can be a competent manager. Unless one knows, recognises and understands the skills and knowledge required of one's staff one cannot properly manage them unless they all happen to be 'yes' men/women! I made that very point to the then head of Signal New Works back in 1987 and while he agreed with the idea he said that the company had decided that managers had no need to be aware of the skills and knowledge of their staff ion any detail as a manager was precisely that and could manage anything! Thereafter I thought of all new managers as people who could 'just about manage' until they demonstrated otherwise. No doubt an unfair generalisation but subsequently borne out in many 'managers' that I subsequently encountered not only in engineering but also in operations! As a manager I was always happy to demonstrate skills to the workforce and I always felt that all managers should be able to do that. It always seemed to me that the higher echelons of management were often not fully 'in the picture' regarding what went on in the lower echelons and at the 'sharp' end because they were only privy to a 'censored' or shaped view rather than the true image (i.e. lots of derrieres always partially under cover). Coupled with the 'old pals act' at several levels an unforeseen exposure of any kind could come as a real shock to those who should have had a finger on the pulse at all times but were often out of touch as their underlings were well versed in mushroom feeding! The Kings Cross fire and subsequent events culminating in devolution to lines served only to highlight what many of us had long known.
|
|