XC strike Sat 13th April OFF

[Class800]

My question is therefore why does the strike change the rostering? I thought the normal roster would be published and then if there is a strike some people who are in the union may choose not to turn up. I've never seen a company change its rosters due to a strike. Maybe railways are unique. Yet this would overcome the issue, as once the strike is off, the rota would be there already

 

[dk1]

My question is therefore why does the strike change the rostering? I thought the normal roster would be published and then if there is a strike some people who are in the union may choose not to turn up. I've never seen a company change its rosters due to a strike. Maybe railways are unique. Yet this would overcome the issue, as once the strike is off, the rota would be there already

If at my TOC the RMT are on strike, as drivers we would all be booked spare at our rostered time & rostered length of turn.

 

[507020]

You don’t just pull people in to undertake safety critical duties such as driving trains at the drop of a hat, when they need to be properly rested, compliant with drug and alcohol policies etc. Well run, sensibly managed businesses also engage with their workforce to avoid strike action from arising in the first place.

This is of course enough of a reason why an either-or roster would appear to be unworkable.

At the risk of taking the thread off topic, what would then happen if someone decided they didn't want to strike, or wasn't in the Union, and wanted to break the strike and work as normal? How would they come in for their rostered shift if they effectively never had one?

As unfortunate as it is, this should be a consideration. As many staff as who turn up, opting not to strike, should be able to run as much of the booked timetable with their counterparts in a different union as possible, without resorting to contingency staff.

That’s surely pretty unlikely unless a whole host of ad hoc train operator’s have sprung up very recently.

This has happened. Do we recall LSL’s Friday Charter, using paths on the WCML which Avanti West Coast were incapable of using, until the DfT told them to discontinue service?

Sounds like calling off the strike is a way of the union using a loophole to ensure their members get paid and don't have to work. (If the dispute is resolved at the last minute and no further action will be called it's a different matter).

Arrangements which allow for the reinstatement of as much of the timetable as possible if action is called off would for one thing eliminate accusations of this. The issue seems to be the alteration of rosters to include skeleton strike timetables using available staff.

That’s not how traincrew rostering works. What on earth are we going to do at this made up training session that is nowhere near our agreed rostered hours?

Probably something considered by management to more closely resemble work than sitting at home or in mess rooms for the full duration of the shift.

 

[dk1]

Probably something considered by management to more closely resemble work than sitting at home or in mess rooms for the full duration of the shift.

If the strike went ahead we’d usually come in for 3-4hrs. If some services where reinstated then they’d share the love so nobody tends to do a full shift & others nothing if it’s possible. Sometimes however you get unlucky but all swings & roundabouts.

 

[skyhigh]

As many staff as who turn up, opting not to strike, should be able to run as much of the booked timetable with their counterparts in a different union as possible, without resorting to contingency staff.

That is what happens though at most TOCs...

Arrangements which allow for the reinstatement of as much of the timetable as possible if action is called off would for one thing eliminate accusations of this.

Why would ASLEF agree to deviate from the standard rostering agreements for the benefit of the company, when they're in also dispute and the strike action was a different union?

 

[dk1]

Why would ASLEF agree to deviate from the standard rostering agreements for the benefit of the company, when they're in also dispute and the strike action was a different union?

Many drivers also remove their names from the Rest Day Available list on RMT strike days in support of their RMT colleagues.

 

[507020]

That is what happens though at most TOCs...

That’s a good thing, but there’s a difference between running as many trains as possible within the normal timetable with available staff and altering the timetable based on what it’s possible to run. The latter reduces the effectiveness of the strike.

Why would ASLEF agree to deviate from the standard rostering agreements for the benefit of the company, when they're in also dispute and the strike action was a different union?

Many drivers also remove their names from the Rest Day Available list on RMT strike days in support of their RMT colleagues.

What I’m suggesting would make it more pertinent for the DfT/TOCs to engage in productive negotiations with all unions, if there was more chance of a full service being run if strikes were called off late, which would benefit ASLEF with the RMT on strike and vice versa in that they would also be more likely to resolve any dispute, but I can see why it isn’t happening like this currently.

Many ASLEF drivers are also former members of the RMT having worked in other grades before becoming drivers.

 

[dk1]

What I’m suggesting would make it more pertinent for the DfT/TOCs to engage in productive negotiations with all unions, if there was more chance of a full service being run if strikes were called off late, which would benefit ASLEF with the RMT on strike and vice versa in that they would also be more likely to resolve any dispute, but I can see why it isn’t happening like this currently.

Many ASLEF drivers are also former members of the RMT having worked in other grades before becoming drivers.

But whatever does or doesn’t happen with a dispute involving a third party, all rostering agreements have to be adhered to by deadlines. There are no grey areas on that.

 

[Class 317]

Looking at Real time trains for Reading some services are being reinstated as VST workings.

 

[NEDdrv]

Daily sheets are prepared with drv turns cancelled, with drvs allocated to man the planned strike day service (all within rostering agreements eg driver could be on a 5hr turn cancelled, becomes daily spare available to be marked to a turn upto 10 hrs).

 

[Bald Rick]

This has happened. Do we recall LSL’s Friday Charter, using paths on the WCML which Avanti West Coast were incapable of using, until the DfT told them to discontinue service?

This is not true. DfT did not ‘tell’ LSL to discontinue service - not least because it has no legal capacity to do so.

Whilst I don’t know, I stongly suspect LSL realised the economics.

 

[185143]

This is not true. DfT did not ‘tell’ LSL to discontinue service - not lesst because it has no legal capacity to do so.

Whilst I don’t know, I stongly suspect LSL realised the economics.

Wasn't it because Avanti could start running the services again in the path being used?

 

[Horizon22]

Extremely inflexible - businesses need to be able to be demand-responsive, and never seen this issue elsewhere

Really? In most jobs with shifts you know what you are doing at least 48 hours out.

You can't just completely mess around with people's work schedule and their work/life balance at such short-notice. Agreements are beneficial for both the company and the workforce, even if they can be complex at times.

I can certainly understand if drivers were told:

If there's no RMT strike - attend a 9-5 training session in Birmingham city centre.

If there's RMT strike - book on at Birmingham New Street at 6am.

Why drivers wouldn't be happy if the likely option changed at less than 48 hours notice.

What about the drivers who finished late shifts the day before strike day? What about people who have early shifts the following day post-strike? What if it was your booked day off? Are you paying them overtime? Some flexibility and movement is fine within reason, but otherwise this causes more problems than it solves.

It isn't practical and regardless would you be happy on a Saturday being told your Monday shift has been completely changed?

Rostering is a complex issue, and coming up with black and white options without any insight are not going to be helpful to the discussion.

 

[507020]

Wasn't it because Avanti could start running the services again in the path being used?

No, because Avanti didn’t (and couldn’t resource to) restart the services they withdrew for several months afterwards. The decision was made (whoever by) without any improvement to Avanti’s situation, leading to the loss of an attractive option for some passengers.

Even if DfT instructions to LSL are not legally binding, there is nothing stopping them from communicating, or LSL from choosing to comply.

Really? In most jobs with shifts you know what you are doing at least 48 hours out.

You can't just completely mess around with people's work schedule and their work/life balance at such short-notice. Agreements are beneficial for both the company and the workforce, even if they can be complex at times.

What about the drivers who finished late shifts the day before strike day? What about people who have early shifts the following day post-strike? What if it was your booked day off? Are you paying them overtime? Some flexibility and movement is fine within reason, but otherwise this causes more problems than it solves.

It isn't practical and regardless would you be happy on a Saturday being told your Monday shift has been completely changed?

Rostering is a complex issue, and coming up with black and white options without any insight are not going to be helpful to the discussion.

With this, if 2 sets of rosters have been swapped between representing normal and strike day timetables, some of the rostered staff will obviously prefer one and others will prefer the other.

Some would definitely lose out (and perhaps be unable to then cover their booked shift) if rosters were immediately reverted without notice, but this may also be the case with retaining strike day timetables when action is called off.

Clearly this is all avoided by resolving the dispute in the first place.

 

[Horizon22]

With this, if 2 sets of rosters have been swapped between representing normal and strike day timetables, some of the rostered staff will obviously prefer one and others will prefer the other.

Some would definitely lose out (and perhaps be unable to then cover their booked shift) if rosters were immediately reverted without notice, but this may also be the case with retaining strike day timetables when action is called off.

Clearly this is all avoided by resolving the dispute in the first place.

And what if a dispropotionate amount prefer one over the other? You have train cancellations. I'm sorry but what you are proposing makes no practical sense and it would be hard to go into the specifics as to why.

Your last sentence is obviously the most vital point!

 

[43066]

I thought the normal roster would be published and then if there is a strike some people who are in the union may choose not to turn up.

You are *massively* underestimating the strength of feeling amongst front line railway staff here, and the level of unionisation.

At almost all TOCs no drivers (or close enough to none to make no difference) will turn up on an ASLEF strike day. To the point where there’s simply no point diagramming a service, let alone advertising it to passengers, other than an incredibly limited one at those few operators where managers will drive, such that planning something around X number of competent drivers becomes realistic.

There will be more contingency guards, who are much quicker to train, but still nowhere near enough to man anything approaching a full service at most operators on an RMT strike day.

Overall, either grade striking will have a major impact on service levels, and neither will be easily reversed by the strike being called off at short notice.

With this, if 2 sets of rosters have been swapped between representing normal and strike day timetables, some of the rostered staff will obviously prefer one and others will prefer the other.

Some would definitely lose out (and perhaps be unable to then cover their booked shift) if rosters were immediately reverted without notice, but this may also be the case with retaining strike day timetables when action is called off.

That simply isn’t how short notice rostering works. It’s never a question of either employer or employee choosing between alternatives - there are nowhere near enough staff to do that, particularly in the case of drivers. It’ll only ever be feasible to have one roster, agreed according to all relevant diagramming principles, which everyone works towards.

Clearly this is all avoided by resolving the dispute in the first place.

Never a truer word spoken.

 

[Bald Rick]

Even if DfT instructions to LSL are not legally binding, there is nothing stopping them from communicating, or LSL from choosing to comply.

But there weren’t any ‘instructions’. Why would there be?

 

[Dan G]

You don’t just pull people in to undertake safety critical duties such as driving trains at the drop of a hat, when they need to be properly rested, compliant with drug and alcohol policies etc. Well run, sensibly managed businesses also engage with their workforce to avoid strike action from arising in the first place.

That's exactly what being "on call" is.

 

[dk1]

I can just imagine at my depot drivers let alone the ASLEF reps being told we are doing a plan A and Plan B roster for Saturday at a couple of days notice The roster for that day would have needed to be on the weeks work the Thursday prior (9 days notice) and unless all turns where cancelled drivers would remain at their rostered times which are only subject to a 1 hour movement on the daily list produced the previous day and then only if all conditions are met.

 

[Clarence Yard]

But there weren’t any ‘instructions’. Why would there be?

Exactly this. LSL presumably had a contingent right under STP to operate in those paths. As soon as Avanti could operate the paths under their existing fixed rights, the LSL right would automatically fall away.

The whole thing would have been handled by NR in the normal way.

 

[manmikey]

That's exactly what being "on call" is.

You do know that rolling stock have a diagram too? and that it's not just drivers rosters that can't be switched about on a whim? There's the emergency working timetable, the published timetable, drivers diagrams too (diagrams as apposed to rosters) and don't forget the conductors diagrams. You change on you have to change all the others.

It's not always about the driver, the railway will not magically return to normal for the "on call" drivers to operate, the railway is an intricate complex system. You can put all the drivers "on call" in your scenario but is the rolling stock placed "on call" too? Those expensive overpriced units are so awkward as they have been set up for one thing and now you change it at short notice and they are now just sitting in their depots & sidings in the wrong place "on call" so you'll use your "on call" drivers to start moving the units to the right place? but there's a queue to get of the depot and the platforms are already full, the driver for the 10:00 is still stuck at the depot and the only driver available at that time doesn't sign the route. Cancel the 10:00 but we need the platform it's on for the 10:25, can't get the 10:00 of the platform as the sidings are full, can it run as the 10:25? No it's a 12 car emu and the 10:25 needs a DMU............This kind of chaos is avoided by TOCs.

Generally if a strike is called off with 24hours notice or less nothing can be done, with 48 hours notice there is a good chance a nearly normal service can be run, less than 48 hours and its unlikely, TOCS will contingency plans for various scenarios like this based on an emergency timetablewhich could run a much reduced service. But what about the lazy, over paid, selfish, sit on their backside and push buttons drivers? If there is a minimum of 24 hours notice then some will go Spare at their booked hours, some will be allocated modified diagrams, importantly all this will be under existing Ts&C's and agreements. Oddly it is only with these rigid, formal agreements and working practices that the railway can function, everybody knows what can and can't be done and where they stand which is to everybody's advantage.

 

[northwichcat]

You do know that rolling stock have a diagram too?

If other operators work the same way as Northern it seems they can be flexible when they want to be and not when they don't.

For example,

A 2 car 150 booked to work a Chester train at Manchester Piccadilly fails. There's a 4 car set due to work a Buxton service. Northern split the 4 car set and both the Buxton and Chester services get 2 cars each.

A unit with a fault is blocking in the unit due to work the next departure. On the adjacent platform there's an empty set of identical train type set to work a much later departure. Northern do not swap the units and consequently run two services 30+ minutes late.

 

[43066]

That's exactly what being "on call" is.

No it isn’t. Because people who are on call, as driver managers regularly are, know in advance and aren’t expected to go in and cover a full eight to ten hour shift with no notice. Similarly traincrew who are spare or standby will be so for a set period of time only, known in advance, and subject to minimum rest periods, fatigue index etc.

It certainly isn’t a case of being told “you’ll be in at 0400-1200 if the strike is off, if it’s on you’ll be in at 0900 for a training course, and we’ll let you know the day before”, as seemed to be the (ridiculous) suggestion above.

 

[northwichcat]

It certainly isn’t a case of being told “you’ll be in at 0400-1200 if the strike is off, if it’s on you’ll be in at 0900 for a training course, and we’ll let you know the day before”, as seemed to be the (ridiculous) suggestion above.

To a non-member of staff that wasn't an unreasonable intrepration of what a driver posted in this thread. He mentioned about operators 'taking the opportunity' to take drivers off booked work and to use the RMT strike day as a 'briefing day' for drivers. If you think non-rail staff are intrepreting things the wrong way, perhaps some drivers need to give more detailed explanations if they want to discuss things on a public forum that isn't exclusively rail staff? If the briefings happen at the same time as the booked work would take place then it's not really an excuse for failing to reinstate the timetable when the strike is called off. If the drivers have been given more sociable hours for the 'briefing days' then it is understandable they don't want their start time changed back at almost no notice.

Perhaps also note if you type certain train related terms into Google railforums comes up near the top of the search results. An average passenger could easily find a thread on this forum when just trying to find the answer to a simple query. Is getting angry when passengers who don't understand what's only been half explained to them, the image you want the general public to have of rail staff?

 

[father_jack]

RMT UPDATE= https://www.rmt.org.uk/news/crosscountry-trains-strike-suspended-after-progress/

Seems to me the company met with the union who agreed to call off but the company never considered that it was too late operationally to reinstate.....

11 April 2024

RMT Press Office:

RMT has suspended planned strike action on CrossCountry this Saturday, after management agreed to intensive talks to resolve the dispute.

CrossCountry had refused to recognise RMT at all grades within the company. This is despite written evidence to the contrary.

Now the company has agreed to sit down with RMT to address our concerns with no changes to agreements in this period.

RMT general secretary Mick Lynch said: "With our members prepared to take strike action this weekend, CrossCountry management has seen the need to sit down with RMT to find a long-term resolution to this impasse.

"We have agreed to suspend strike action and take up this opportunity.

"But our strike mandate remains in place, so we will name new strike dates if that becomes necessary."

 

[43066]

To a non-member of staff that wasn't an unreasonable intrepration of what a driver posted in this thread. He mentioned about operators 'taking the opportunity' to take drivers off booked work and to use the RMT strike day as a 'briefing day' for drivers. If you think non-rail staff are intrepreting things the wrong way, perhaps some drivers need to give more detailed explanations if they want to discuss things on a public forum that isn't exclusively rail staff?

The situation around rostering has been clearly explained many times, but some appear not to be interested in the explanations, and just want to make accusations of unions “using loopholes”, without any evidence.

Is getting angry when passengers who don't understand what's only been half explained to them, the image you want the general public to have of rail staff?

Who is getting angry? Nobody is owed an explanation, and the readership of this forum is in no way reflective of the general public.

RMT UPDATE= https://www.rmt.org.uk/news/crosscountry-trains-strike-suspended-after-progress/

Seems to me the company met with the union who agreed to call off but the company never considered that it was too late operationally to reinstate.....

You’d think the announcement of talks and strikes being called off would be considered good news, but seemingly not by some posters on here!

 

[skyhigh]

For example,

A 2 car 150 booked to work a Chester train at Manchester Piccadilly fails. There's a 4 car set due to work a Buxton service. Northern split the 4 car set and both the Buxton and Chester services get 2 cars each.

A unit with a fault is blocking in the unit due to work the next departure. On the adjacent platform there's an empty set of identical train type set to work a much later departure. Northern do not swap the units and consequently run two services 30+ minutes late.

With respect that shows a lack of understanding of how unit diagramming works. For your examples the situation could be -

The four car set, 150101 is on NH101 diagram which ends the day at Newton Heath. 150102 coupled to it is on NH102 diagram which also finishes at Newton Heath. 150103 working NH103 diagram fails. The remainder of 103 diagram is within fuel range of 150102 and also ends at Newton Heath. So it can be split off without any issues as the change will be corrected by the end of service.

195101 is blocked in by a failed unit. It's booked to stable overnight on a platform at Leeds. On the next platform is 195102 which is due to work a later train and finish the night at Newton Heath for an exam. If the units were swapped 102 would not have enough fuel range to do the rest of the diagram and the next day's work. It would also have to be stopped for the exam so the end result would be the next day's diagram would have to be cancelled as the unit wouldn't be available. There aren't any spare 195s at Leeds the next day so the problem can't be corrected and will result in cancellations.

It's a complete fallacy to say that they're just being flexible when they want to because "oh look there's a unit there so they should have used that instead"

 

[northwichcat]

The situation around rostering has been clearly explained many times, but some appear not to be interested in the explanations, and just want to make accusations of unions “using loopholes”, without any evidence.

It looks like you've been posting on here for over 4 years and have made over 9,000 posts. I hope you don't think people who've registered since have read your previous 9,000 posts (and everyone else's thousands of posts)

Who is getting angry?

You're using an aggressive tone. You decided to post twice that my response was wrong, the second time calling it ridiculous. Yet you didn't find the time to explain what the actual situation is and why what I concluded from reading another driver's post was incorrect.

Nobody is owed an explanation

Proves my point. You're not trying to be assertive, you're trying to be aggressive.

and the readership of this forum is in no way reflective of the general public.

That isn't what I said. I said the general public can get an idea of what train crews are really like on here.

You’d think the announcement of talks and strikes being called off would be considered good news, but seemingly not by some posters on here!

The public want train services that are running. If calling off the strikes doesn't reinstate services the only winners are union members who then get paid to do nothing.

With respect that shows a lack of understanding of how unit diagramming works. For your examples the situation could be -

The four car set, 150101 is on NH101 diagram which ends the day at Newton Heath. 150102 coupled to it is on NH102 diagram which also finishes at Newton Heath. 150103 working NH103 diagram fails. The remainder of 103 diagram is within fuel range of 150102 and also ends at Newton Heath. So it can be split off without any issues as the change will be corrected by the end of service.

195101 is blocked in by a failed unit. It's booked to stable overnight on a platform at Leeds. On the next platform is 195102 which is due to work a later train and finish the night at Newton Heath for an exam. If the units were swapped 102 would not have enough fuel range to do the rest of the diagram and the next day's work. It would also have to be stopped for the exam so the end result would be the next day's diagram would have to be cancelled as the unit wouldn't be available. There aren't any spare 195s at Leeds the next day so the problem can't be corrected and will result in cancellations.

It's a complete fallacy to say that they're just being flexible when they want to because "oh look there's a unit there so they should have used that instead"

The thing is with Northern they frequently short form a service to prevent a cancelled service due to a failed train, but they never seem to swap units if one gets trapped in. I wonder if it's because sometimes the units are trapped in because of reasons outside their control, such as a signal issue or another operator's train failing, so they'll be compensated if they don't swap but if they do it's extra work for the planners so they think "Let's not bother even looking into it."

 

[Horizon22]

It looks like you've been posting on here for over 4 years and have made over 9,000 posts. I hope you don't think people who've registered since have read your previous 9,000 posts (and everyone else's thousands of posts)


You're using an aggressive tone. You decided to post twice that my response was wrong, the second time calling it ridiculous. Yet you didn't find the time to explain what the actual situation is and why what I concluded from reading another driver's post was incorrect.

No but plenty of people on this thread alone have explaining (in a simple sense) how train crew rostering works, and that some of the proposed ‘plans’ are unpractical and unviable.

To go into more detail, you’d have to have page long replies, explaining the background, fatigue matrix, rolling working week, time in cab, break requirements etc. That’s before we even go into how the on-the-day rostering can be altered with spare, cover and standby drivers as opposed to the base roster and booked Rest Days, block Annual Leave etc all within official agreements between TOCs and unions (with local differences). Sure there’s some elements which might be more ‘old-fashioned’ than others but they’ve come about through discussion and comprise and for the safety of all involved.

I didn’t see anyone being “aggrsssive” personally - maybe a little blunt but I suppose trying to explain a complex topic to people who just think drivers are being ‘inflexible’ and coming up with blanket “just do 9-5 training instead” is a little frustrating as it’s so far removed from what is actual reality.

 

[northwichcat]

and coming up with blanket “just do 9-5 training instead” is a little frustrating as it’s so far removed from what is actual reality.

Based on the below post, why would it be unreasonable for me to think that drivers may be moved to briefing days with different times to what they would work?

I dont know if this applies at Cross country , but some TOC's have used RMT strike days as an opportunity to mark a lot of drivers up to their briefing days , taking them off their booked work (as they can under agreements) and moving them to different book on times for briefing days . Once you have posted a roster reflecting this , unless agreements allow you cannot then change those previously posted rosters back to reflect what the actual timetable requires .

As someone outside the industry I would be surprised if unions didn't object if TOCs arranged briefings at times like 5am on Saturday because that's when you'd be driving if you were doing a normal driving day!

I didn’t see anyone being “aggrsssive” personally -

I actually looked too quickly and realised it was originally @dk1 who said "That’s not how traincrew rostering works. What on earth are we going to do at this made up training session that is nowhere near our agreed rostered hours?" and then @43066 who said "“you’ll be in at 0400-1200 if the strike is off, if it’s on you’ll be in at 0900 for a training course, and we’ll let you know the day before”, as seemed to be the (ridiculous) suggestion above"

Other than referring to a "briefing day" as a "training session" and presuming it may take place close to a station where a driver might start their shift, without necessarily being in the same place, it does feel like rail staff don't want to attack each other, even if they think they're wrong so they make non-rail staff the scapegoat.