Arriva Rail North DOO

[Robertj21a]

For the fourth time of asking, would you happily trade a guarantee of permanent job security for a contract maybe lasting 6 years ?

Can I just chip in.......

Can you give an example of a job with permanent job security ?

 

[pemma]

For the fourth time of asking, would you happily trade a guarantee of permanent job security for a contract maybe lasting 6 years ?

There is no guarantee for the reason I pointed out. Job security currently depends on demand for services. If you can't write a proper valid question don't be surprised no-one answers it.

 

[Robertj21a]

Costs increased with privatisation. What you have now is layer upon layer of management and non jobs. It takes an army to work out who gets what when it comes to dividing up ticket sales.

I've always recognised that your posts can be sensible and pragmatic. Do you believe that costs would reduce with nationalisation ?

 

[Gems]

No idea, that's for them to determine. I wouldn't be surprised if they started looking at the existing terms of employment. If they give, say, 6-12 months notice of a significant change to the terms under which they will employ staff it may help focus the minds of the RMT on where they should be most concerned.

I'd be surprised.

Every strike day since the start we have had this. "We can't guarantee anything if it goes on" and every time they say it another shovel full of earth is tossed out of the trench as we dig in deeper.
I'll tell you what Northern's problem is shall I. They'll still need guards to operate the stock incapable of running DCO, and those guards will just keep going with the action. That is their problem, and I'm sure they know it.

 

[Gems]

I've always recognised that your posts can be sensible and pragmatic. Do you believe that costs would reduce with nationalisation ?

There is no magic wand is there. Some costs will go down, some may not. One area is that if all the network was nationalised, you would have dozens and dozens of drivers on different rates of pay.
The network is fragmented, and the best you would get is dozens of nationalised different old TOC's.

 

[Bletchleyite]

For the fourth time of asking, would you happily trade a guarantee of permanent job security for a contract maybe lasting 6 years ?

There is no such thing as a guarantee of permanent job security.

A 6 year guarantee is more than most people have. The only guarantee most people have is their notice period.

 

[Robertj21a]

I'd be surprised.

Every strike day since the start we have had this. "We can't guarantee anything if it goes on" and every time they say it another shovel full of earth is tossed out of the trench as we dig in deeper.
I'll tell you what Northern's problem is shall I. They'll still need guards to operate the stock incapable of running DCO, and those guards will just keep going with the action. That is their problem, and I'm sure they know it.

Perhaps they should offer a pay rise to those guards who volunteer to be trained as OBS (or similar customer-facing onboard role).

 

[Tomnick]

A bit of me hopes that Arriva now drop the 'no redundancies' guarantee (as it's clearly not appreciated by any guards) and then also take more severe action to bring this dispute to an end, quickly.

Rubbish....

There's no need for anybody to lose a job. How is it that people on here simply can't understand that ?

Which way do you want it? If there's no need for anybody to lose a job and no intention of reducing staffing levels, then there's no need for redundancies anyway. As soon as redundancies are threatened, the integrity of the various assurances that staffing levels will be maintained and that this is all about more visible staff and better customer service etc. are challenged.

 

[Gems]

Perhaps they should offer a pay rise to those guards who volunteer to be trained as OBS (or similar customer-facing onboard role).

Perhaps they should.

I think we have lost the topic here a little though, become a shouting match and people have lost sight of the issues. The problem Northern have is that the DFT did not understand the north of England franchise before imposing changes. You tell me a company that can impose a change when they have no stock capable of running in that form? It's like British Airways saying they are going to fly non stop to Auckland when everyone knows it would come down somewhere over the Indian ocean as it ran out of fuel. But still they had to have their way.
This started when the government had a majority, and they thought they could impose their will easily, well now they don't, and Brexit has all but paralyzed every other aspect of running the country. Add to that a Transport secretary whom even the most ardent Tory must think is pretty stupid, and it is no hard to see how we arrived here.

Northern have not got the capability to come along one Monday morning and say. "Today such and such routes will be operated by the driver" We all saw that, A lot of passengers saw that. Only failing didn't. Even managers have expressed serious reservations that they have the ability or talent to bring this in smoothly. We need a period of calm, and that means everyone, and I mean everyone backs off. If that doesn't happen, I'm not joking when say this could drag on for years.

 

[Robertj21a]

Which way do you want it? If there's no need for anybody to lose a job and no intention of reducing staffing levels, then there's no need for redundancies anyway. As soon as redundancies are threatened, the integrity of the various assurances that staffing levels will be maintained and that this is all about more visible staff and better customer service etc. are challenged.

I don't mind which way anybody plays it. I just think there's a lot of ridiculous comments on here from guards who seem to think their world will collapse if they don't have their job guaranteed for life - crazy !
I also feel that Arriva may now need to assert a bit of authority as the employer.

 

[Confused52]

But Arriva have gone running back with the begging bowl. I bet the DFT can find money for German state railway profits.

Mick Cash would be proud of the second sentence. I just looked at the 2017 accounts of DB (UK) Investments, which lots of Arriva businesses all over Europe, and made a loss of around 77m before it got 44m from the whole Arriva Group in the UK, so still in a loss situation. Doesn't look as if much money got to Deutsche Bahn AB does it?

 

[Gems]

Mick Cash would be proud of the second sentence. I just looked at the 2017 accounts of DB (UK) Investments, which lots of Arriva businesses all over Europe, and made a loss of around 77m before it got 44m from the whole Arriva Group in the UK, so still in a loss situation. Doesn't look as if much money got to Deutsche Bahn AB does it?

Mick Cash would, would he? I think anyone with any financial savvy would to be honest.
Where would the money come from? This is a franchise depending on £282,000,000 of taxpayers money. What portion of that should be profit?. Non of it should. This is the flaw in rail privatisation. Expecting to make profits out of subsidies.

 

[Robertj21a]

Perhaps they should.

I think we have lost the topic here a little though, become a shouting match and people have lost sight of the issues. The problem Northern have is that the DFT did not understand the north of England franchise before imposing changes. You tell me a company that can impose a change when they have no stock capable of running in that form? It's like British Airways saying they are going to fly non stop to Auckland when everyone knows it would come down somewhere over the Indian ocean as it ran out of fuel. But still they had to have their way.
This started when the government had a majority, and they thought they could impose their will easily, well now they don't, and Brexit has all but paralyzed every other aspect of running the country. Add to that a Transport secretary whom even the most ardent Tory must think is pretty stupid, and it is no hard to see how we arrived here.

Northern have not got the capability to come along one Monday morning and say. "Today such and such routes will be operated by the driver" We all saw that, A lot of passengers saw that. Only failing didn't. Even managers have expressed serious reservations that they have the ability or talent to bring this in smoothly. We need a period of calm, and that means everyone, and I mean everyone backs off. If that doesn't happen, I'm not joking when say this could drag on for years.

Thanks.

The issue is still, surely, that Arriva want to bring in DOO (or DCO) and have offered no redundancies. However, that's not enough for the RMT and they're still demanding a safety-critical member of staff on every train. We don't need any period of calm just so that it continues to drag on through 2019 and 2020, the principles should have been agreed by now. After plenty of opportunities for the RMT to co-operate, the travelling public may well now be looking for the employer to become more assertive.

 

[B&I]

Can I just chip in.......

Can you give an example of a job with permanent job security ?

Not the question I asked, though 'senior civil servant' and 'backbencher in many parts of the country' come pretty damn close

 

[Ken H]

Perhaps they should.

I think we have lost the topic here a little though, become a shouting match and people have lost sight of the issues. The problem Northern have is that the DFT did not understand the north of England franchise before imposing changes. You tell me a company that can impose a change when they have no stock capable of running in that form? It's like British Airways saying they are going to fly non stop to Auckland when everyone knows it would come down somewhere over the Indian ocean as it ran out of fuel. But still they had to have their way.
This started when the government had a majority, and they thought they could impose their will easily, well now they don't, and Brexit has all but paralyzed every other aspect of running the country. Add to that a Transport secretary whom even the most ardent Tory must think is pretty stupid, and it is no hard to see how we arrived here.

Northern have not got the capability to come along one Monday morning and say. "Today such and such routes will be operated by the driver" We all saw that, A lot of passengers saw that. Only failing didn't. Even managers have expressed serious reservations that they have the ability or talent to bring this in smoothly. We need a period of calm, and that means everyone, and I mean everyone backs off. If that doesn't happen, I'm not joking when say this could drag on for years.

I am sure the new 319 operated services could be converted easily.
probably do Leeds/Bradford/Ilkley/Skipton electrics and Leeds-Domcaster locals too.
I assume its just installing CCTV on the platforms and put monitors in the cabs.
not sure any DMU services are suitable.

 

[B&I]

Rubbish....

There's no need for anybody to lose a job. How is it that people on here simply can't understand that ?

You're right, there isn't any need, but there is also only a weak guarantee that they won't for 6 years, and beyond that nothing. Also you are encouraging Northern to sack staff. How much job security would there be if they started listening ?

 

[Confused52]

Of course job requirements will change over time. We however have thrown out the baby with the bathwater, and the social and economic consequences are disastrous.

And again, that wasn't the question I was asking. Guards have job sercurity for so long as trains can't run without them. Would you happily trade that in if you were in their position ?

Probably yes because history tells us that if something looks too good to be true it always is. It would incentivise the industry to make it no longer true that trains couldn't run without guards and, as it is clearly possible, it would happen completely and not on just a percentage of the services. That is what happens in the real world where change is unstoppable and rational people know it. If you embrace change you are generally better off than those who don't - and that from someone employed for a whole working life in an industry that has changed faster than most.

 

[pt_mad]

To be blunt, the guard’s ‘safety critical skills’ are redundant. Arguments about it over the last few years in the face of the history of the DOO system have been unsatisfactory, and the reality that this is all about the RMT protecting guard bargaining power at all costs is gaining wider recognition. No criticism of the RMT intended for the intent - but a dynamic strategy would be to spot the chances to consolidate their power and evolve, and in that they have proven hopeless.

The guard’s ‘customer service skills’ are far more valuable to the future railway. These are also the only skills that could justify a future long-term job role, plus some general emergency training. Observers shouldn’t underestimate how lowly customer service/revenue is respected by numbers of existing guards. One look at the average customer service by guards provided on LNWR services (as mentioned above) shows how far the industry has to go. Step into all number of high street stores, transport providers etc. and staff on considerably less average earnings than guards please their customers far better as an overall comparison. They wouldn’t shut the shop down when it was busy where a guard decides to not bother with ticket checks or announcements at their discretion.

Driving these skills and knowledge levels is a leap that is out of the grasp of the RMT (and much of the TOC thinking). The RMT is too proud to even mention that guards are vital to revenue protection on their strike propaganda, yet they claim - for instance - they are involved with managing electrical isolations.

There’s a future for customer service roles on the railway - far more so, long term, than drivers or signallers in high numbers. For instance, there is no reason Southern’s On Board Supervisor job couldn’t be an industry blueprint, backed up by a reasonable ASLEF staffing agreement. It should be expected that the TOCs following on from that dispute such as GA, SWR etc would learn the pitfalls and do better with their revised guard jobs.

I don't think customer service skills are actually more valuable than safety critical skills. Other industries pay minimum wage for 'customer assistant' jobs. It's probably viewed by many as de-skilling, and is probably frightening for guards who up till now have needed 3 months training in order to be competent. Add to that the fact they feel and know they are really genuinely needed in the job, because they need to physically be there for the train to operate.

Exactly.

Some people on this thread are motivated by a genuine belief that a DOO railway would be better-run and more efficient. I can understand this argument (as i think the RMT have overstated the safety case), though some of those arguing it have I think discredited themselves by bordering on fanatical in their defence of every aspect of DOO and its proponents.

There is however another element here which believes the government's economic fairy stories (despite the evidence to the contrary), or is devoted to 'free market' econonic theory (regardless of how inapplicable it proves to be to the operation of the railways), or actively supports the longer term neoliberal project to undermine the rights and economic power of most of the British workforce (presumably because they think they're the sort of superior beings who'll come out on top in this process, or because their oen employment history has been marked by instability and they resent anyone whose employment history hasn't). This last group is the one keenest to 'stay on topic' because they don't wqnt anyone to consider what is proposed for the guards within the wider economic context, as they realise that many people will still be uncomfortable with supporting this wider process.

When I first commented on this thread, I asked why certain posters seemed to be unable to comprehend why the guards would opppose a process which threatened their future job security. The answer is of course that certain people on here don't like job security, when it applies to other people, and would prefer a total dog-eat-dog society.

More to the point, would any person in authority who wishes to de-skill guards be willing to work as a customer host or on board supervisor themselves? Or, would they be willing to sacrifice many of their historic terms at the will of their employer just because the employer asked for it? Would they not even try to resist?

'Customer service' roles are disappearing across the country at frightening speed. Any job which is not technically vital to enable some physical process to happen is at risk in this country

Agree. Some have suggested the guards safety critical skills are redundant. They are not redundant, because without them today the train won't run. If they don't turn up tomorrow, the train will be cancelled. Don't forget, in a wider basis, other industries won't just fob off safety critical skills when someone applies for a job as an ex senior conductor or train manager. This is likely to be well thought of outside the industry. I've never heard anyone else going 'oh no, he's no good he's got a bad job, as a train conductor'.

As we're going through a technological revolution employers will want employees who are willing to accept changes to their role if they want the role long term, nothing capitalist about that.

But to achieve this they will need to go through the necessary processes .Which involves firm industrial action if members vote for it. The stakeholders know this.

If the industry and or the public really want DOO that much, and have concluded that it is worth it, then this is surely the pain that was inevitable along the way in achieving it. In a highly unionised industry which has been working to these practices since the 70s, it was never going to pass without huge industrial action. Citizens rights in the UK mean that it can't be avoided as it's a right to strike in private industries. If the public truly believe it will lead to a more efficient railway, and want it, why wouldn't they be willing to put up with the inevitable pain along the way?
Or is it that they'd rather the dispute just be resolved asap no matter what the outcome?

 

[Gems]

I am sure the new 319 operated services could be converted easily.
probably do Leeds/Bradford/Ilkley/Skipton electrics and Leeds-Domcaster locals too.
I assume its just installing CCTV on the platforms and put monitors in the cabs.
not sure any DMU services are suitable.

319's are not coming over to the 'Leeds North West Triangle'

 

[B&I]

There is no guarantee for the reason I pointed out. Job security currently depends on demand for services. If you can't write a proper valid question don't be surprised no-one answers it.

For someone who has clearly become absolutely obsessed with this issue, you know very little about it.

Current position: trains cannot run without guards. Existence if guard grade guaranteed.

Future position: trains can run without guards. Guard grade in jeopardy.

For the fifth time, are you going to answer the question ? Or is there some other way you'd like to evade it ?

 

[B&I]

There is no such thing as a guarantee of permanent job security.

A 6 year guarantee is more than most people have. The only guarantee most people have is their notice period.

Wrong. See previous posts.

 

[Dave1987]

No idea, that's for them to determine. I wouldn't be surprised if they started looking at the existing terms of employment. If they give, say, 6-12 months notice of a significant change to the terms under which they will employ staff it may help focus the minds of the RMT on where they should be most concerned.

I think if you were a railway manager you would quickly find yourself in a work to rule scenario, begging for staff to help you out of the hole you have dug yourself into. The railway runs on the goodwill of its staff to go above and beyond.

 

[B&I]

I think if you were a railway manager you would quickly find yourself in a work to rule scenario, begging for staff to help you out of the hole you have dug yourself into. The railway runs on the goodwill of its staff to go above and beyond.

It's always easy urging other people to be tough from the comfort of your armchair

 

[Robertj21a]

Not the question I asked, though 'senior civil servant' and 'backbencher in many parts of the country' come pretty damn close

So, you don't actually have a single example ! Why make such a song and dance about something that doesn't exist ?

 

[Dave1987]

Can I just chip in.......

Can you give an example of a job with permanent job security ?

The DFT could very very easily solve all this by saying the future franchises will be required to keep on board staffing levels to a specific amount. They won't so its pretty clear the DFT want conductors down on the dole queue.

 

[Eccles1983]

Can I just chip in.......

Can you give an example of a job with permanent job security ?

Civil servants, firemen, police officers, doctors, in fact any clinical part of the NHS, soldiers sailors and airmen.

None have been made redundant. Some may of been offered to go and accepted but they are examples.

 

[Confused52]

Mick Cash would, would he? I think anyone with any financial savvy would to be honest.
Where would the money come from? This is a franchise depending on £282,000,000 of taxpayers money. What portion of that should be profit?. Non of it should. This is the flaw in rail privatisation. Expecting to make profits out of subsidies.

Just no. The franchise does put capital in for the assets and the profit is essentially equivalent to a management fee for the assets that they purchase for the time being. The value can go down if they make a mess and it will this time. That management fee is in effect a return on capital employed which is not exactly high but predictable which is what utility investors want, low to medium return and low risk. If the "profit" goes up the extra gets clawed back by the DfT which is why calling it profit is ridiculous and it doesn't get back to Germany anyway.

 

[Robertj21a]

I think if you were a railway manager you would quickly find yourself in a work to rule scenario, begging for staff to help you out of the hole you have dug yourself into. The railway runs on the goodwill of its staff to go above and beyond.

Yes, I accept that, certainly not ideal. But as many on here have pointed out, there is zero goodwill on Northern. Regular strikes aren't what the ordinary travelling public would consider to be a sign of goodwill - and they are the parties to this dispute who seem to be the least considered nowadays.

How would you react to 6 months notice of Arriva's intention to change your terms of employment so that you might be required to undertake OBS-type roles ?

 

[Confused52]

The DFT could very very easily solve all this by saying the future franchises will be required to keep on board staffing levels to a specific amount. They won't so its pretty clear the DFT want conductors down on the dole queue.

The government does not want anyone on the dole queue because they have to pay you instead of you paying them tax.

 

[Ken H]

The DFT could very very easily solve all this by saying the future franchises will be required to keep on board staffing levels to a specific amount. They won't so its pretty clear the DFT want conductors down on the dole queue.

yeah. that would increase the subsidy then. but its only taxpayers money so who cares.

what happens with a driver operated train and there is no 'guard'. does the train run anyway or do you cancel. what would passenger prefer?