|
|
Post by Alex on Dec 14, 2016 1:01:22 GMT
Enough time for a slash and a quick ciggie, and I'm happy. Ahhh....now I see what you mean....I thought initially you meant zero turnaround time! Literally get there, change the blind and ETM (does iBus change itself?) and go again. Yes, I would be happy with those (except I use an electric cigarette now, have done since Jan 2015, my wife's decision, but not all bad as I don't get the colds I used to get) and I would add to that list a quick couple of texts to HQ to see how she is (important when I am working, as I do lates, again, something she would like to change). In my line of work, it's common not to have time for both of those things! My line is not too bad for stand time (except that we run late a lot and are entitled to the bare minimum 4 minutes 'change ends' time) but others are hard work. 5-6 min stands are the norm on the Piccadilly and Northern lines (and for a fair amount of the time, the Jubilee too), and it's especially harsh in the case of the Picc, when you consider that most terminal points are either taken on the Heathrow loop, or reversing sidings away from stations (Cockfosters has a very short stand), meaning you can't have either  The worst I have seen are on the DLR, ThinLizzy may be able to answer this properly. Before, when Serco had the contract and Woolwich had a 10 min service to Bank all day, I think there was about 7-8 mins at Woolwich. Then when Keolis took over (with the 'upped' service with the contract) it went down to a 1 min turnaround at Woolwich and again, a reversing siding (straight in-straight out) jobbie at Bank  I can't imagine working like that, a 1 min turnaround seems crazy..... Sorry to go off on a different one there (!) but I thought you meant you liked having no turnaround time at all  |
|
|
|
Post by ThinLizzy on Dec 14, 2016 12:27:32 GMT
Enough time for a slash and a quick ciggie, and I'm happy. Ahhh....now I see what you mean....I thought initially you meant zero turnaround time! Literally get there, change the blind and ETM (does iBus change itself?) and go again. Yes, I would be happy with those (except I use an electric cigarette now, have done since Jan 2015, my wife's decision, but not all bad as I don't get the colds I used to get) and I would add to that list a quick couple of texts to HQ to see how she is (important when I am working, as I do lates, again, something she would like to change). In my line of work, it's common not to have time for both of those things! My line is not too bad for stand time (except that we run late a lot and are entitled to the bare minimum 4 minutes 'change ends' time) but others are hard work. 5-6 min stands are the norm on the Piccadilly and Northern lines (and for a fair amount of the time, the Jubilee too), and it's especially harsh in the case of the Picc, when you consider that most terminal points are either taken on the Heathrow loop, or reversing sidings away from stations (Cockfosters has a very short stand), meaning you can't have either The worst I have seen are on the DLR, ThinLizzy may be able to answer this properly. Before, when Serco had the contract and Woolwich had a 10 min service to Bank all day, I think there was about 7-8 mins at Woolwich. Then when Keolis took over (with the 'upped' service with the contract) it went down to a 1 min turnaround at Woolwich and again, a reversing siding (straight in-straight out) jobbie at Bank I can't imagine working like that, a 1 min turnaround seems crazy..... Sorry to go off on a different one there (!) but I thought you meant you liked having no turnaround time at all It was all part of the new schedule, the 10 minute dwell at Woolwich was lovely, you get used to it though and having to quickly nip upstairs to use the loo. |
|
|
|
Post by VPL630 on Dec 17, 2016 23:57:01 GMT
I'll be on the 96 today (Sunday) departing Woolwich at 1604, 1831, 2144 and 2344, If I make it to Bluewater 1716, 1934 and 2250, I'll be sure to keep you updated on how well/bad the day goes
|
|
|
|
Post by nickfreckle on Dec 18, 2016 9:27:32 GMT
I'll be on the 96 today (Sunday) departing Woolwich at 1604, 1831, 2144 and 2344, If I make it to Bluewater 1716, 1934 and 2250, I'll be sure to keep you updated on how well/bad the day goes I will wave as I pass you. I'm on 96's too. Start at midday. Running number 152 until 1533 and running number 163 from 1648 to 2134. I was on it yesterday (Saturday) and it was dead. So much early running, but was left alone as headways were good. Here's hoping it's the same today. I doubt it though, as the wife is going down there today, so it's bound to be carnage... |
|
|
|
Post by john on Dec 18, 2016 10:08:11 GMT
I'll be on the 96 today (Sunday) departing Woolwich at 1604, 1831, 2144 and 2344, If I make it to Bluewater 1716, 1934 and 2250, I'll be sure to keep you updated on how well/bad the day goes I will wave as I pass you. I'm on 96's too. Start at midday. Running number 152 until 1533 and running number 163 from 1648 to 2134. I was on it yesterday (Saturday) and it was dead. So much early running, but was left alone as headways were good. Here's hoping it's the same today. I doubt it though, as the wife is going down there today, so it's bound to be carnage... Wish I could say the same about the 372. Saw one in Rainham and said he was 7 late, so Lakeside was busy clearly!! |
|
|
|
Post by VPL630 on Dec 18, 2016 10:32:14 GMT
I'll be on the 96 today (Sunday) departing Woolwich at 1604, 1831, 2144 and 2344, If I make it to Bluewater 1716, 1934 and 2250, I'll be sure to keep you updated on how well/bad the day goes I will wave as I pass you. I'm on 96's too. Start at midday. Running number 152 until 1533 and running number 163 from 1648 to 2134. I was on it yesterday (Saturday) and it was dead. So much early running, but was left alone as headways were good. Here's hoping it's the same today. I doubt it though, as the wife is going down there today, so it's bound to be carnage... I'm 154 and 159 respectively, I hope it's all quiet, don't really have much idea of the turns, yesterday seemed dead in general, I've done the same duty on the 55's and the last 2 Saturdays of doing it I've had to pull over and stop to avoid breaching driving hours, 5H:30M bang on second half, with standtime deducted it's do able but you only need to be 20 late and you've had it |
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Dec 18, 2016 21:05:33 GMT
The rule is subject to : only the employees who can be clearly identified as providing the service are protected. This means that someone allocated to a route being transferred is protected, but someone in a general pool that includes the route isn't. The new company is obliged to take those protected, but not the others. The employee doesn't have to go and is free to leave as long as notice is given to leave on transfer date. The old employer needs to give new employer at least 4 weeks notice of name, age, main details of employment. Also disiplinary action, any employee grieviences, and any legal action in last 2 years The accepted rule is if over 50% of your role is transferring you are within scope of TUPE. Now this should apply to other staff as well as drivers eg controllers. It is up to the company losing the contract to invoke TUPE and follow the correct processes and rules, otherwise the employees remain their responsibility. TUPE should not be either optional or voluntary. You are either within scope or not. I think if the losing company wanted to transfer say 5 out 35 drivers over on TUPE, this could be refused as TUPE can not be selective. Although even thought controllers at times may do more than 50% and engineers etc. they were not TUPED when routes were lost. In 2012 the law was changed back again in buses land from being implemented around 2007. So now if a route is lost the drivers do not have to go with the route if the company still has vacancies or are openly recruiting. Now at the moment some companies that were happy to push out higher paid senior drivers a few years ago with TUPE when they had a waiting list of drivers to come in due to the recession; the opposite has happened since the economy has picked up and there is now a shortage of drivers. They are trying to force drivers to stay if they loose the route and telling them that they would not be entitled to the same pay & conditions if they transfer to a company if they won a route of them as they refused to stay when the company had work for them.
|
|
|
|
Post by snowman on Dec 18, 2016 21:21:34 GMT
The accepted rule is if over 50% of your role is transferring you are within scope of TUPE. Now this should apply to other staff as well as drivers eg controllers. It is up to the company losing the contract to invoke TUPE and follow the correct processes and rules, otherwise the employees remain their responsibility. TUPE should not be either optional or voluntary. You are either within scope or not. I think if the losing company wanted to transfer say 5 out 35 drivers over on TUPE, this could be refused as TUPE can not be selective. Although even thought controllers at times may do more than 50% and engineers etc. they were not TUPED when routes were lost. In 2012 the law was changed back again in buses land from being implemented around 2007. So now if a route is lost the drivers do not have to go with the route if the company still has vacancies or are openly recruiting. Now at the moment some companies that were happy to push out higher paid senior drivers a few years ago with TUPE when they had a waiting list of drivers to come in due to the recession; the opposite has happened since the economy has picked up and there is now a shortage of drivers. They are trying to force drivers to stay if they loose the route and telling them that they would not be entitled to the same pay & conditions if they transfer to a company if they won a route of them as they refused to stay when the company had work for them.
All sorts of local staff retention ideas can happen. This is different to legal status of TUPE. In its simplest form if there is a shortage of staff, pay or bonuses are likely to be offered (much cheaper than recruiting and training). In theory any supervisor, engineer, manager etc that works majority for a route could be TUPEd. The new employer cannot force someone to transfer (but of course can encourage people to join by offering higher pay etc), doesn't mean they will do something. Some of the threats are clearly hollow as anyone formally TUPEd will maintain pay and employment conditions, that is the legal minimum. |
|
|
|
Post by nickfreckle on Dec 18, 2016 23:16:37 GMT
Guess who i had the honour of having on my bus for a rounder on the 96 this afternoon:D
Good to meet you dude.
|
|
|
|
Post by VPL630 on Dec 18, 2016 23:47:08 GMT
Guess who i had the honour of having on my bus for a rounder on the 96 this afternoon:D Good to meet you dude. Nice to meet you too, I did survive, almost did another loop of Crayford but luckily noticed just in time, been a great day |
|
|
|
Post by nickfreckle on Dec 19, 2016 7:48:16 GMT
Guess who i had the honour of having on my bus for a rounder on the 96 this afternoon:D Good to meet you dude. Nice to meet you too, I did survive, almost did another loop of Crayford but luckily noticed just in time, been a great day I think I saw you at the nights at Bexleyheath on my way up there. Went mechanical on my last run back. Passenger commented on a strong smell of burning rubber from the back of 15066. It was really stinking when I investigated at Bluewater. Called it in, and was told to carry on. Got out of Bluewater to Stone, and they called me back saying stop immediately. By the time engineer arrived, smell had gone. Drive it back to PD with engineers van following, and thankfully the stench had returned. No idea what it was though. Didn't wait about to find out. Just wanted to get home. Didn't even waste my time filling in a docket. |
|
|
|
Post by portman227 on Dec 20, 2016 22:10:45 GMT
Been on the 122's for so long now, its like it is 2 seperate routes. Crystal Palace to Lewisham being almost a route and Lewisham to PD. Running times is a bit tight although the stand time is fantastic. Bearing in mind it seems drivers take out any bus they wish. Two drivers i very well know took out diesels on the 122. I'd understand that but its a lot harder to do that on a 53!
|
|
|
|
Post by sid on Dec 24, 2016 12:23:39 GMT
Been on the 122's for so long now, its like it is 2 seperate routes. Crystal Palace to Lewisham being almost a route and Lewisham to PD. Running times is a bit tight although the stand time is fantastic. Bearing in mind it seems drivers take out any bus they wish. Two drivers i very well know took out diesels on the 122. I'd understand that but its a lot harder to do that on a 53! Isn't the 122 generally regarded as the 'premier route' amongst drivers at PD? |
|
|
|
Post by portman227 on Dec 24, 2016 23:36:23 GMT
Been on the 122's for so long now, its like it is 2 seperate routes. Crystal Palace to Lewisham being almost a route and Lewisham to PD. Running times is a bit tight although the stand time is fantastic. Bearing in mind it seems drivers take out any bus they wish. Two drivers i very well know took out diesels on the 122. I'd understand that but its a lot harder to do that on a 53! Isn't the 122 generally regarded as the 'premier route' amongst drivers at PD? More or less, but 53 has that supreme title i believe. 122 would be next. But i do think it needs a timetable revamp. 12 minute headway is too infrequent for such a busy route. it can easily turn to 15 minute and that's basically asking for a short turn. |
|
|
|
Post by Paul on Dec 26, 2016 21:54:17 GMT
Been on the 122's for so long now, its like it is 2 seperate routes. Crystal Palace to Lewisham being almost a route and Lewisham to PD. Running times is a bit tight although the stand time is fantastic. Bearing in mind it seems drivers take out any bus they wish. Two drivers i very well know took out diesels on the 122. I'd understand that but its a lot harder to do that on a 53! Isn't the 122 generally regarded as the 'premier route' amongst drivers at PD? My dad laughed when I told him this; he's on the 53 rota |
|
I can't imagine working like that, a 1 min turnaround seems crazy.....
