Arriva Rail North DOO

[Dave1987]

That is abject nonsense I have seen very little evidence of people doing what they perceive the Government want. If they did these damned strikes wouldn't be happening would they?

If the Tories thought they could get away with it, I’m sure they would ban strikes completely, ban collective bargaining and probably ban unions completely. If the Government didn’t want the rise of the ‘gig’ economy and casualisation of work to expand they would have legislated against it. Not just done the Taylor review and made piecemeal responses to it.

 

[Confused52]

If the Tories thought they could get away with it, I’m sure they would ban strikes completely, ban collective bargaining and probably ban unions completely. If the Government didn’t want the rise of the ‘gig’ economy and casualisation of work to expand they would have legislated against it. Not just done the Taylor review and made piecemeal responses to it.

When they could get away with it they didn't ban strikes on the railways. The Government cannot just decide that it doesn't like something and ban it when it is a contractual arrangement entered into by both parties unless there is an imbalance of negotiating power that is being applied or it is not in the public interest. That just isn't true for the gig economy unless it is causing significant loss of tax and NI revenue. The test does apply for curbing rail union power because there is clearly an imbalance when services continue to need to be run, the workforce has to be TUPEd to a successor company and the workforce is clearly disadvantaging the puplic. So the only action in 2017 affecting the railway unions was to bring into force section 3, amongst others, of the 2016 Trade Union Act requiring a higher threshold which the RMT saw coming and avoided in the case of Northern, The Government only bans things it just doesn't like in socialist states. Free societies don't work the way you suggest.

 

[Carlisle]

When have the RMT refused to talk? The RMT entered into talks without any preconditions. The RMT asked Northern 3 questions which Northern said it didn't know the answers to and were told by ACAS to adjourn and come back when they had spoken to the DFT and had some firm proposals.

You suggested a few weeks ago that it suited the RMT to drag this dispute out, if your prediction was correct then it almost entirely explains the reasoning behind why the meeting went the way it did

 

[scrapy]

You suggested a few week ago that it suited the RMT to drag this dispute out, if your prediction was correct then it almost entirely explains the reasoning behind why the meeting went the way it did

It suits the RMT to get a resolution that its members want as soon as possible. It is my opinion with no change from the company they are more likely to get a favourable result if the dispute goes on longer. There obviously seems more of a political will now to keep a second person on the train.

It's my opinion that there should be a second person on the train should be safety trained to a high standard. (They may as well be as they are already being paid to be there). Im not bothered who dispatches the train or opens the doors but given it adds to a driver's workload and there is nothing particularly wrong with the status quo it seems a lot of effort to change it for little gain.

When you say they went into the meeting the way they did, What do you mean? What do you know about how RMT went into the meeting? I've heard from 2 sources one RMT and one Northern management that Richard Allen (asst Northern MD) didn't exactly impress anyone at ACAS as he simply said he couldn't negotiate because they didn't have any authority from the DFT. What else should the RMT have done in your opinion other than wave a white flag.

 

[yorksrob]

What I don't understand, is why aren't the RMT and TfN laying the finger of blame on the DfT, if they're the ones holding everything back ?

They should both be calling the DfT out for sabotaging the recent talks, yet they seem to be immune from any criticism or scrutiny. There never seems to be any mention of them in their pronouncements or releases.

By the way, have we ever heard anything of the clarification Northern were said to be obtaining from TfN, regarding the second person.

 

[scrapy]

What I don't understand, is why aren't the RMT and TfN laying the finger of blame on the DfT, if they're the ones holding everything back ?

They should both be calling the DfT out for sabotaging the recent talks, yet they seem to be immune from any criticism or scrutiny. There never seems to be any mention of them in their pronouncements or releases.

By the way, have we ever heard anything of the clarification Northern were said to be obtaining from TfN, regarding the second person.

The RMT have been quite vocal in blaming the government/dft. TFN have called for greater powers from the government. I am not sure if Northern have yet gone to the DFT, but these things take weeks/months rather than days and ACAS won't oversee any more talks until Northern have firm proposals so I doubt there will be any movement before the new year. Northern will probably see getting a bailout from the DFT as a more pressing matter than resolving this dispute.

 

[Robertj21a]

What I don't understand, is why aren't the RMT and TfN laying the finger of blame on the DfT, if they're the ones holding everything back ?

They should both be calling the DfT out for sabotaging the recent talks, yet they seem to be immune from any criticism or scrutiny. There never seems to be any mention of them in their pronouncements or releases.

By the way, have we ever heard anything of the clarification Northern were said to be obtaining from TfN, regarding the second person.

I'm not sure that anyone can blame the DfT if they are simply complying with their stated aims. Perhaps they may be right in pursuing more flexible arrangements ?

 

[Darandio]

The RMT have been quite vocal in blaming the government/dft.

In the last fortnight following the DfT and TfN comments, yes they have. Before that, very little by the way of blaming them. Before that it was very much an emphasis on a foreign owned basket case company stringing along the union. Over the last 6 months you wouldn't even have realised how much involvement there is from anyone else if you solely relied on RMT press releases.

 

[yorksrob]

The RMT have been quite vocal in blaming the government/dft. TFN have called for greater powers from the government. I am not sure if Northern have yet gone to the DFT, but these things take weeks/months rather than days and ACAS won't oversee any more talks until Northern have firm proposals so I doubt there will be any movement before the new year. Northern will probably see getting a bailout from the DFT as a more pressing matter than resolving this dispute.

It always comes across as a bunfight between the RMT and Northern when I read it, but if that changes then good.

 

[yorksrob]

I'm not sure that anyone can blame the DfT if they are simply complying with their stated aims. Perhaps they may be right in pursuing more flexible arrangements ?

Northern is a private company that's been franchised to run a rail service. The Government should give it the freedom to manage its own industrial relations, or else, if it wants to micro-manage industrial relations, it should run the railway with full and transparent accountability to passengers.

 

[Meerkat]

The DfT cannot allow franchises to agree things that handcuff future franchisees.

 

[Carlisle]

Richard Allen (asst Northern MD) didn't exactly impress anyone at ACAS as he simply said he couldn't negotiate because they didn't have any authority from the DFT. .

ACAS will by now be fully aware of just about every minor detail of all sides positions on the DOO/DCO debate anyway , given they’ve also tried (and failed) to find a breakthrough in several similar disputes , eg .Scotrail, Southern, SWR, ok they’ve succeeded to a certain extent on Merseyrail mainly because the union was eventually willing to engage in meaningful talks over a prolonged period rather than just calling endless strike dates in the hope of ultimate capitulation by the TOC

 

[Robertj21a]

Northern is a private company that's been franchised to run a rail service. The Government should give it the freedom to manage its own industrial relations, or else, if it wants to micro-manage industrial relations, it should run the railway with full and transparent accountability to passengers.

It doesn't matter that it's a private company, that's totally irrelevant. The body that calls the shots, and determines the specification for each franchise, is the DfT.

In my book, the piper calls the tune. As the 'boss', the DfT have every right to lay down what they require in order to 'modernise' the workforce and/or increase flexibility.

 

[Carlisle]

Northern is a private company that's been franchised to run a rail service. The Government should give it the freedom to manage its own industrial relations, or else, if it wants to micro-manage industrial relations, it should run the railway with full and transparent accountability to passengers.

True, but freedom to manage doesn’t equal permission for unions to run the entire show either, if it does, the Dft as the managing authority are right to want to be involved to some degree.

 

[yorksrob]

It doesn't matter that it's a private company, that's totally irrelevant. The body that calls the shots, and determines the specification for each franchise, is the DfT.

In my book, the piper calls the tune. As the 'boss', the DfT have every right to lay down what they require in order to 'modernise' the workforce and/or increase flexibility.

On the contrary, I don't see why a contracting authority is meddling in industrial relations at all. Either say what service you want and let them get on with it, or, if you want to micro-manage the day to day running of the service, manage it and face the music.

 

[yorksrob]

True, but freedom to manage doesn’t equal a permission for unions to run the entire show either, if it does, the Dft are right to want to be involved

The last I saw, TfN had urged the Union and Northern Rail to talk on the basis that a second member of staff is wanted on trains. It was the DfT that waded in throwing its weight around and setting everything back for passengers.

 

[Meerkat]

A second person doesn’t necessarily mean what the RMT thinks it does

 

[Carlisle]

It's my opinion that there should be a second person on the train should be safety trained to a high standard. (They may as well be as they are already being paid to be there). Im not bothered who dispatches the train or opens the doors but given it adds to a driver's workload and there is nothing particularly wrong with the status quo it seems a lot of effort to change it for little gain.
.

A statement similar to yours might have been sufficient to have suspended strike action and proceeded to further negotiations, but going by what’s been reported publicly the RMT wanted almost absolute assurance of the status quo before talking any further

 

[Robertj21a]

On the contrary, I don't see why a contracting authority is meddling in industrial relations at all. Either say what service you want and let them get on with it, or, if you want to micro-manage the day to day running of the service, manage it and face the music.

But the DfT, as contracting authority, isn't meddling with industrial relations. They are specifying how they want the franchise to operate.
If I set up my own company and decide that I want a franchisee to take on a part of it then it is up to me to specify my requirements - not for the franchisee, or any union, to tell me they won't comply.

 

[Halifaxlad]

ban strikes completely

As much as I hate to say it, that's an idea that could NOT solve this dispute but get the trains running again!

 

[scrapy]

Don’t you think that by now ACAS surely know just about every minor detail of both sides positions on the DOO/DCO debate anyway , given they’ve tried (and failed)!find a breakthrough in several similar disputes so far, eg .Scotrail, Southern, SWR,

I'm sure they do but Northern can't even make it clear what they want from talks. It's as though they don't actually want to resolve anything they just want to stop industrial action to take short term profit before a bailout or handing the franchise back.

 

[scrapy]

A statement similar to yours might have been sufficient to have suspended strike action and proceeded to further negotiations, but going by what’s been reported publicly the RMT wanted almost absolute assurance of the status quo before talking any further

They have said they will talk without preconditions but to suspend action they want assurances on three things (although they may realistically take 2 out of 3). So far Northern haven't given any ground either.

RMT leaders don't want another backlash from members like they got earlier in the year when they suspended action only to realise the company weren't interested in talks just delaying tactics.

 

[Killingworth]

A flash of late night inspiration, madness, lunacy. Why not hand the franchise to the RMT and see how they can manage a railway? They seem to think it's simple within the contract set down by the DfT. With staff support surely they should be able to do much better. Bear in mind 26p per km passenger subsidy.

 

[Halifaxlad]

A flash of late night inspiration, madness, lunacy. Why not hand the franchise to the RMT and see how they can manage a railway? They seem to think it's simple within the contract set down by the DfT. With staff support surely they should be able to do much better. Bear in mind 26p per km passenger subsidy.

In the hands of the RMT they would probably pass it to the government in the hope of a re-nationalized railway. The government as we all know would either put it back out on the franchise market, in the event they ran it themselves, cut costs on every corner and most likely actually get rid of the guard. I can see no-logic in re-nationalization if the RMT are serious about keeping the guard.

 

[Robertj21a]

They have said they will talk without preconditions but to suspend action they want assurances on three things (although they may realistically take 2 out of 3). So far Northern haven't given any ground either.

RMT leaders don't want another backlash from members like they got earlier in the year when they suspended action only to realise the company weren't interested in talks just delaying tactics.

The RMT often claim that they will enter in to talks without pre-conditions - as long as a safety-critical guard is retained on every train !!

That's never going to be worth talking about when it's in direct conflict with what the DfT require Arriva to achieve in the franchise. In any event, most people have got wise to the tactics used by the RMT - their attempt to retain membership numbers by protecting the roles of staff not even yet employed should not be their main priority.

 

[yorksrob]

ACAS will by now be fully aware of just about every minor detail of all sides positions on the DOO/DCO debate anyway , given they’ve also tried (and failed) to find a breakthrough in several similar disputes , eg .Scotrail, Southern, SWR, ok they’ve succeeded to a certain extent on Merseyrail mainly because the union was eventually willing to engage in meaningful talks over a prolonged period rather than just calling endless strike dates in the hope of ultimate capitulation by the TOC

But Scotrail has a workable solution and isn't subject to strike action. That is a successful resolution.

 

[yorksrob]

The RMT often claim that they will enter in to talks without pre-conditions - as long as a safety-critical guard is retained on every train !!

That's never going to be worth talking about when it's in direct conflict with what the DfT require Arriva to achieve in the franchise. In any event, most people have got wise to the tactics used by the RMT - their attempt to retain membership numbers by protecting the roles of staff not even yet employed should not be their main priority.

Well one has to ask why the DfT is even in this position of power. TfN has clearly stated that it wants a second person on every train. If you're having that, it makes some sense for that person to have some safety critical competencies. The DfT is acting on behalf of a remote Government in London with barely anything resembling a mandate from the North of England, particularly given the farce that is the first past the post electoral system.

 

[Robertj21a]

But Scotrail has a workable solution and isn't subject to strike action. That is a successful resolution.

Southern also has their OBS solution and no strikes.

 

[yorksrob]

Southern also has their OBS solution and no strikes.

Why can't we have the Scotrail solution.

 

[Carlisle]

But Scotrail has a workable solution and isn't subject to strike action. That is a successful resolution.

The original proposal had the onboard role concentrating solely on passengers needs, widely acknowledged to be the better solution, providing of course sufficient staff are employed, and there’s currently an RMT overtime ban on Scotrail .