Arriva Rail North DOO

[MDB1images]

Has anyone a list to compare the overall percentage of trains run on strike days from (for example) 4 months ago compared to last Saturday?

 

[northwichcat]

What incentive have the guards got to agree to their own extinction ?

You have no evidence that on board staff will become redundant on Northern. If everyone strikes because they suspected something they might not like might happen at some point in the future everyone would be striking every week. The accountant comparison is proof that some people being scared of their role being eliminated doesn't mean it'll happen and even if it does you'll likely be retired first. Are you striking because you want the children of today to be the guards of tomorrow and remain as guards until they retire?

 

[yorksrob]

A reduction in staff wouldn't be possible without an acceptence that a proportion of trains will be running, every day, with no second person onboard. The number of train daily services will increase so the same or fewer staff would sacrifice that. Even if it is only 5% or less that would be a change that the Union won't tolerate. I suspect that there is a need for it to be greater than that for any efficiency savings that are a part of the FA cost proflie, if you say they all have to be paid the same?

And that, I suspect, is what it boils down to.

Someone in London has decided that the subsidy is too high, and the "trains running without guards in extremis" is actually a backdoor way to de-staff trains on a more permanent basis.

This is in spite of the fact that we're told that the subsidy counterbalances the much larger capital spending in the South East, they're still determined to cut even if it means years of disruption for passengers.

 

[northwichcat]

And that, I suspect, is what it boils down to.

Someone in London has decided that the subsidy is too high, and the "trains running without guards in extremis" is actually a backdoor way to de-staff trains on a more permanent basis.

This is in spite of the fact that we're told that the subsidy counterbalances the much larger capital spending in the South East, they're still determined to cut even if it means years of disruption for passengers.

We do know from the Northern consultation DfT looked at proper DOO on Northern i.e. London Underground style but it proved costly and impractical to implement by the time ticket barriers at every Northern station isn't a realistic proposal and neither is station staff. It was also pointed out to them (by both passengers and bidders) that there's a lot of ticket-less travel. Therefore, instead they looked at how staff could have more revenue and customer service focused roles to eliminate the need to employ lots of extra staff for revenue or assisting disabled passengers.

 

[B&I]

And that, I suspect, is what it boils down to.

Someone in London has decided that the subsidy is too high, and the "trains running without guards in extremis" is actually a backdoor way to de-staff trains on a more permanent basis.

This is in spite of the fact that we're told that the subsidy counterbalances the much larger capital spending in the South East, they're still determined to cut even if it means years of disruption for passengers.

Quite. And what amazes me is that, despite the very strong evidence that this government and the DfT are happy to provide the poorest rail service they can get away with in the north, a surprising number of northerners on here seem to think that these bodies can do no wrong in this dispute, and couldn't possibly have any ulterior motives

 

[northwichcat]

Has anyone a list to compare the overall percentage of trains run on strike days from (for example) 4 months ago compared to last Saturday?

Did they strike on any Saturdays 4 months ago? The number of services Northern are scheduled to run on Saturdays is lower than the weekday number, so if Northern claim 30% of Saturday services are operating tomorrow and claimed 4 months ago that 40% of weekday services were running, the difference is not 25%.

 

[northwichcat]

Quite. And what amazes me is that, despite the very strong evidence that this government and the DfT are happy to provide the poorest rail service they can get away with in the north, a surprising number of northerners on here seem to think that these bodies can do no wrong in this dispute, and couldn't possiblt have any ulterior motives

There's also evidence that it's DfT who want to get rid of the guard role on Northern (backed by Rail North) and that Abellio, Arriva and Govia weren't that keen on it, which is why we got the DCO compromise in the franchise agreement instead of DOO. Logically if the RMT want to keep the guard role they should be against nationalisation or against an organisation like Rail North running the franchise directly and in favour of franchises being longer and DfT having less direct control over them. However, it seems their dislike for foreign companies and their aspiration for being able to call nationwide strikes again means they don't see the obvious even when it's staring them in the face.

 

[Bletchleyite]

A reduction in staff wouldn't be possible without an acceptence that a proportion of trains will be running, every day, with no second person onboard. The number of train daily services will increase so the same or fewer staff would sacrifice that. Even if it is only 5% or less that would be a change that the Union won't tolerate. I suspect that there is a need for it to be greater than that for any efficiency savings that are a part of the FA cost proflie, if you say they all have to be paid the same?

And that to me is not an issue that in itself is the RMT's concern.

It may be ASLEF's concern if drivers are concerned about the precise methods of DOO, or the quality of the equipment, or legal issues in the event of a PTI issue, or whatever, but RMT should not be striking about it in the context that no present guard will be made redundant.

Whether something is OK for passengers or not is none of their business; passenger groups are for that purpose.

 

[HH]

Like with any role some companies employ people on the cheap and others employed only the best and pay them well. I spoke to someone a while ago who became an accountant, had no plans to do so and Maths wasn't her strongest subject - it seems accurate data entry and the ability to spot mistakes are more important than the ability to add up in your head or on paper.

Having done A Level Maths myself I'm not sure why you would need to do Maths at university if you wanted to be an accountant - what you do at A Level is already a lot more advanced than what accountants will use on a daily basis.

Having some acuity in numbers definitely helps in spotting mistakes in numbers. I would also note that those that lost jobs were essentially bookkeepers (and those that are left do not all need to be particularly bright, let alone good at Math); the newly created jobs are modellers and the like, for whom maths and related skills are a definite advantage.

 

[HH]

There's also evidence that it's DfT who want to get rid of the guard role on Northern (backed by Rail North) and that Abellio, Arriva and Govia weren't that keen on it, which is why we got the DCO compromise in the franchise agreement instead of DOO.

I hear that Abellio bid DCO on West Midlands and it was negotiated out by DfT ahead of the franchise start, so maybe Abellio aren't as anti-DCO as you make out. In fact, what was the last franchise Abellio have run where they didn't try to introduce some form of DCO?

 

[northwichcat]

I hear that Abellio bid DCO on West Midlands and it was negotiated out by DfT ahead of the franchise start, so maybe Abellio aren't as anti-DCO as you make out. In fact, what was the last franchise Abellio have run where they didn't try to introduce some form of DCO?

Abellio franchises:
- Anglia (original)
- Greater Anglia (new)
- Scotrail
- Northern (old)
- Merseyrail
- West Midlands Trains

One where it came up was Merseytravel's choice and not part of the original agreement. Whose decision was Scotrail DCO?

Also isn't it more relevant how many bids they have submitted including DOO/DCO? If you submit bids and don't win then presumably you don't use the same approach for future bids.

 

[LowLevel]

And that to me is not an issue that in itself is the RMT's concern.

It may be ASLEF's concern if drivers are concerned about the precise methods of DOO, or the quality of the equipment, or legal issues in the event of a PTI issue, or whatever, but RMT should not be striking about it in the context that no present guard will be made redundant.

Whether something is OK for passengers or not is none of their business; passenger groups are for that purpose.

So purely out of interest do you believe that the only important matter in terms of employment is a) literally being employed and b) job satisfaction has no relevance?

I enjoy the challenge of being a guard. I do it very well. I deal with incidents, look after people and run my train safely. I'm a solid go to for control and the job allows me a degree of authority to use my initiative. I work as a genuinely equal team member with the train driver and they know I've got their back if something kicks off.

In short, it stops me getting bored because it challenges me.

Removing all of my operational knowledge, relegating me to effectively a toothless revenue protection inspector in fear of stepping on the platform, with no say in anything about how the train runs cut off from the operational and technical side of the railway and effectively being a passenger in the event of anything occurring. Being in a jcollins world of being banned from having a quick cup of tea in the back cab during a 10 hour shift. Potentially being left behind miles from home because my connecting train is 5 minutes late. Loss of status.

I've worked on a gateline and it's not for me (Or many other people. It's mindless drudgery for the most part right on the frontline of the unhappiest 'customers' who may not want to pay and be very friendly about it or otherwise). I also know other displaced people trapped in jobs they hate by their ringfenced salary and mortgage taken out during better times.

And you're really saying, quite on top of any other arguments, which I also happen to believe quite passionately in, that my union has no business in defending me from any of the above?

I work hard at my job because I enjoy it and all trumpet blowing aside I'm good at it. I've won company awards and I go home happy after work.

Relegate me to bring a revenue protection assistant or worse a station gateline assistant and I'll become just another resentful railwayman.

Or I go driving and become locked away in the cab apart from the people I genuinely enjoy interacting with.

What a miserable state of affairs!

 

[Carlisle]

So purely out of interest do you believe that the only important matter in terms of employment is a) literally being employed and b) job satisfaction has no relevance?

I enjoy the challenge of being a guard. I do it very well. I deal with incidents, look after people and run my train safely. I'm a solid go to for control and the job allows me a degree of authority to use my initiative. I work as a genuinely equal team member with the train driver and they know I've got their back if something kicks off.

In short, it stops me getting bored because it challenges me.

Removing all of my operational knowledge, relegating me to effectively a toothless revenue protection inspector in fear of stepping on the platform, with no say in anything about how the train runs cut off from the operational and technical side of the railway and effectively being a passenger in the event of anything occurring. Being in a jcollins world of being banned from having a quick cup of tea in the back cab during a 10 hour shift. Potentially being left behind miles from home because my connecting train is 5 minutes late. Loss of status.

I've worked on a gateline and it's not for me (Or many other people. It's mindless drudgery for the most part right on the frontline of the unhappiest 'customers' who may not want to pay and be very friendly about it or otherwise). I also know other displaced people trapped in jobs they hate by their ringfenced salary and mortgage taken out during better times.

And you're really saying, quite on top of any other arguments, which I also happen to believe quite passionately in, that my union has no business in defending me from any of the above?

I work hard at my job because I enjoy it and all trumpet blowing aside I'm good at it. I've won company awards and I go home happy after work.

Relegate me to bring a revenue protection assistant or worse a station gateline assistant and I'll become just another resentful railwayman.

Or I go driving and become locked away in the cab apart from the people I genuinely enjoy interacting with.

What a miserable state of affairs!

That’s all extremely understandable and worthy of consideration in any negotiations on the grades future, unfortunately it’ll end up being compleyely overshadowed by the totally detached and selfish way your union has handled any request for change .

 

[HH]

Abellio franchises:
- Anglia (original)
- Greater Anglia (new)
- Scotrail
- Northern (old)
- Merseyrail
- West Midlands Trains

One where it came up was Merseytravel's choice and not part of the original agreement. Whose decision was Scotrail DCO?

Also isn't it more relevant how many bids they have submitted including DOO/DCO? If you submit bids and don't win then presumably you don't use the same approach for future bids.

Original Anglia was too short to introduce DCO and Northern was with SERCO (and they weren't even Abellio back then). Since then - AGA, tick; ScotRail, tick; Merseyrail, tick; WMT, tick. There would have also been a tick if they had won TSGN and Northern and I know of at least one other. They must really hate DCO.

 

[northwichcat]

Original Anglia was too short to introduce DCO and Northern was with SERCO (and they weren't even Abellio back then). Since then - AGA, tick; ScotRail, tick; Merseyrail, tick; WMT, tick. There would have also been a tick if they had won TSGN and Northern and I know of at least one other. They must really hate DCO.

Merseyrail is also with Serco and the franchise wasn't let on the basis of DOO being introduced but when Merseytravel priced up the new trains option and found that level boarding was doable they were the ones who came up with DOO, on the recommendation of the local Labour led councils.

I notice you didn't answer the question of whether DOO/DCO on Scotrail was the decision of Transport Scotland or the franchise holder.

 

[PR1Berske]

That’s all extremely understandable and worthy of consideration in any negotiations on the grades future, unfortunately it’ll end up being compleyely overshadowed by the totally detached and selfish way your union has handled any request for change .

Absolutely. It's been said time and time again. The RMT could have said, "let's accept change is coming and make sure we secure the best deal for our workers."

Instead they went for "Boo the Germans and don't budge an inch!"

When modern trains are introduced, when ASLEF drivers are in those trains, the RMT will look like complete fools.

 

[scrapy]

Original Anglia was too short to introduce DCO and Northern was with SERCO (and they weren't even Abellio back then). Since then - AGA, tick; ScotRail, tick; Merseyrail, tick; WMT, tick. There would have also been a tick if they had won TSGN and Northern and I know of at least one other. They must really hate DCO.

The previous Northern franchise 'Northern Rail' was never just Serco. It was originally joint Serco and Nedrail. Abellio came about when Nedrail renamed it's foreign operations. There was no change of ownership Nedrail was just renamed Abellio.

 

[northwichcat]

The previous Northern franchise 'Northern Rail' was never just Serco. It was originally joint Serco and Nedrail. Abellio came about when Nedrail renamed it's foreign operations. There was no change of ownership Nedrail was just renamed Abellio.

Plus two, or was it three, franchise extensions were given to Abellio & Serco, one of which included the introduction of 319s which had to have modifications so that the door and dispatch duties were done by the guard not the driver.

 

[PR1Berske]

The idea of doing the same job for decades and expecting my offspring to be able to do the same too is very outdated

Try telling that to some of the more strident posters on here!

 

[Bletchleyite]

So purely out of interest do you believe that the only important matter in terms of employment is a) literally being employed and b) job satisfaction has no relevance?

No, but I do believe jobs are created because an employer needs that specific job done, and change over time, and that it's unrealistic and unreasonable to expect that they won't, or to use coercion (striking) to try to achieve that. What might be sensible would be to go to Northern with a costed counterproposal for retention of guards, but that is probably non-viable. If of course you don't like the new OBS job there are options, such as, when a job becomes available, to go and work for an IC TOC who is unlikely to get rid of guards any time soon.

Some guards will no doubt prefer to do the customer facing stuff and will like the OBS role. As the 15x are going nowhere, that also means for guards like you there will likely be the option to remain one as long as you wish.

So what's the problem (other than the rather debatable safety argument)? It seems to come down to potential future guards, and that's to me unreasonable.

To me, the future of the grade is and should be no concern of the RMT other than in respect of those who presently hold the role.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Absolutely. It's been said time and time again. The RMT could have said, "let's accept change is coming and make sure we secure the best deal for our workers."

Instead they went for "Boo the Germans and don't budge an inch!"

When modern trains are introduced, when ASLEF drivers are in those trains, the RMT will look like complete fools.

Exactly this.

 

[Wombat]

So purely out of interest do you believe that the only important matter in terms of employment is a) literally being employed and b) job satisfaction has no relevance?

I don't mean this to sound confrontational but the TOC doesn't employ you for the purpose of giving you job satisfaction, does it? Like the rest of us, you're employed to do whatever it is that your employer needs to be done, which (everywhere else) will change over time. Hopefully you can squeeze a sufficient amount of job satisfaction out of it - and go elsewhere if you can't - but no employer is going to maintain the status quo purely because the workforce enjoys it. If that was the case we'd still be reading newspapers pieced together by typesetters.

 

[Meerkat]

Pretty much every finance operational level job, including the lower ends of accountancy, is being or will be outsourced or automated.
That includes me - I was TUPE’d and am waiting for a hugely overdue project to finish before redundancy (rail isn’t the only industry that can monstrously balls up projects......).
You don’t see us all going on strike to keep future generations doing unnecessary roles, we just shrug and move on.

 

[HH]

Merseyrail is also with Serco and the franchise wasn't let on the basis of DOO being introduced but when Merseytravel priced up the new trains option and found that level boarding was doable they were the ones who came up with DOO, on the recommendation of the local Labour led councils.

I notice you didn't answer the question of whether DOO/DCO on Scotrail was the decision of Transport Scotland or the franchise holder.

Both sides have to agree before it can be part of the franchise agreement. In franchise the TOC would never suggest DCO, but they could argue strongly against it. Abellio haven't.

 

[HH]

The previous Northern franchise 'Northern Rail' was never just Serco. It was originally joint Serco and Nedrail. Abellio came about when Nedrail renamed it's foreign operations. There was no change of ownership Nedrail was just renamed Abellio.

I never said it was just Serco - I was pointing out that it wasn't just Abellio (who were known as Nedrail at that time and had a different management and a different relationship with NS, so they might as well be a different company!).

 

[northwichcat]

Both sides have to agree before it can be part of the franchise agreement. In franchise the TOC would never suggest DCO, but they could argue strongly against it. Abellio haven't.

Yet Merseyrail isn't a typical franchise, it's a similar arrangement to what TfGM have with KeliosAmey for Metrolink where the franchise holder doesn't choose what rolling stock they use. As far as I can see neither DOO or DCO is written in to the agreement.

 

[LowLevel]

I don't mean this to sound confrontational but the TOC doesn't employ you for the purpose of giving you job satisfaction, does it? Like the rest of us, you're employed to do whatever it is that your employer needs to be done, which (everywhere else) will change over time. Hopefully you can squeeze a sufficient amount of job satisfaction out of it - and go elsewhere if you can't - but no employer is going to maintain the status quo purely because the workforce enjoys it. If that was the case we'd still be reading newspapers pieced together by typesetters.

It does not though it is in it's interest to maintain a fulfilled happy workforce where possible (and getting into disputes that have caused far more disruption than the intended changes will save in 50 years is not a great way of achieving that or anything else, for either side).

My point was that I do however expect my union to represent me in my aspirations even if the employer doesn't.

Work involving customer service should be as fulfilling and enjoyable as possible - staff who are happy in their work tend to treat their customers far better.

 

[Starmill]

And that, I suspect, is what it boils down to.

Someone in London has decided that the subsidy is too high, and the "trains running without guards in extremis" is actually a backdoor way to de-staff trains on a more permanent basis.

This is in spite of the fact that we're told that the subsidy counterbalances the much larger capital spending in the South East, they're still determined to cut even if it means years of disruption for passengers.

Yes. I wish we had some of the redacted information about exactly what they agreed on the subsidy profile in terms of what money goes where, and exactly how they were going to get to that position vis a vis on-board and station staff (many of whom are still employed by Carlisle Security with minimal training and apparently no railway specific knowledge).

 

[xc170]

Has it been confirmed how many more Saturdays these strikes are going to continue for? I read that strikes have been planned up to Christmas, if so, this is going to stop me seeing family before Christmas, working Mon-Fri, weekends are the only time I can make the journey.

It's about time the RMT gave up on this unwinnable war they've got them selves into.

 

[LOL The Irony]

Has it been confirmed how many more Saturdays these strikes are going to continue for?

A TfGM tweet yesterday said the 29th of December.