• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Arriva Rail North DOO

Status
Not open for further replies.

scrapy

Established Member
Joined
15 Dec 2008
Messages
2,081
Given that most trains are timed in and out of most stations 30 seconds apart there is no 20-40 seconds to gain including the actual time it takes for passengers to board and alight . And the significance of the time gained is wholly relevant to the length of time the service takes to get from A-B anyway . Thinking of services I currently work with 20 stops the journey time is well over 1hr 30 in most cases it is 2 hours or more .So 6-13 minutes is not that significant of a time saving .

I can also think of plenty of busy self dispatch stations that would need staff on the platform to achieve any time saving , because currently guards will be blowing the whistle ,advising people to use all doors and directing people with bikes/luggage at busier times at these stations .

And of course there is no guarantee of this time saving anyway because depending on what method of working is introduced for the second person to make themselves aware of passengers needing assistance they might need to physically look on the platform to check nobody needs assistance .
I am currently sat on a frequently stopping guard operated 142 Northern service. Having just timed the dwell time at stations we were stopped for between 30 seconds and 40 seconds at the last five stops. The time between the all doors except the local closing and the train moving was between 6 and 10 seconds with one exception where the driver seemed slow to react and it took slightly longer (16sec). How you can save 20-40 seconds with dco I don't know?
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,541
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Driver open/guard close is a substantial compromise on the traditional guards role and offers real benefits in terms of time/efficiency.

It certainly is, though it's of note that OBS working saves an additional 5-10 seconds per stop depending on the type of unit (primarily the speed of the doors). Easily 10 seconds on a Class 350 dispatched from the saloon.

Before anyone says "but that's not much", actual DOO would save about 5 and a half minutes on a run from Hunts Cross to Southport. After all, simply adding hustle alarms required an extension of the Ormskirk to Liverpool running time by two minutes (30 to 32) in the 1990s. Driver open would still save about 2.5 minutes on that run.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,824
Location
Yorks
That is just your view, it won't be others. Some people, presumably including the DfT, will want the flexibility that is expected out in the normal 'real' world of business - so that trains can always run (even with just the driver, in exceptional circumstances) and that 'safety critical' isn't just used by the RMT to protect their membership numbers forever more. The compromise, if any, should be for a second person to be an OBS - primarily dedicated to customer service, not door controls.

I wouldn't mind betting that those people aren't the ones having to put up with never ending industrial action. For a compromise to work it has to be agreed by both sides, and I would rather they agreed a compromise that works, such as the Scotrail solution, rather than some fantasy that will just result in further strikes.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,824
Location
Yorks
I’ve no idea if that argument will ultimately triumph but it’s almost the same argument the RMT always put forward whenever a TOC has considered altering the guards role in any meaningful way over the last 20 years,
Scotral wasn’t a compromise ( zero flexibility gained) it was simply a pragmatic decision taken by the Scottish govt at the time (which I appreciate a fair number agree with) to back down rather than endure any further strikes by the RMT and/or an ASLEF ballot. .

I'm all for compromise if it gets the trains running.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,824
Location
Yorks
Are you real? London Underground carries nearly HALF of ALL rail passenger journeys made in the country.

These trains really are operated with only one person on board - right out to the fringes of the system. in relation to the huge number of people carried every day the number of incidents is vanishingly small - in 2017-18 there was a total of 4,700 injuries reported of which 110 were major injuries.

Again in 2017-18 there was a total of 437 train accidents on all of the railways in Great Britain, of which 3% (14 incidents) occurred on the Underground.

Seems that trains with more than one member of staff on board are more dangerous...

Maybe it is the best way to operate trains.

It is true that we have a very safe system generally, which is why I'm not sure why I, and my fellow passengers are being expected to endure such a large level of disruptive industrial action over a change which will involve no reduction in headcount anyway, as second persons are acknowledged to be needed on the trains in Northern land, and little, if any improvement in safety.
 

ComUtoR

Established Member
Joined
13 Dec 2013
Messages
9,399
Location
UK
These trains really are operated with only one person on board - right out to the fringes of the system. in relation to the huge number of people carried every day the number of incidents is vanishingly small - in 2017-18 there was a total of 4,700 injuries reported of which 110 were major injuries.

Again in 2017-18 there was a total of 437 train accidents on all of the railways in Great Britain, of which 3% (14 incidents) occurred on the Underground.

Can we have some context and a source for those statistics please.
 

ComUtoR

Established Member
Joined
13 Dec 2013
Messages
9,399
Location
UK
I have the report. Nm I have the other safety report :)

The statistics for the mainline are :
  • There were 4 Passenger fatalities.
  • There were 318 passenger major injuries in 2017/18.
  • There were 6,4004 minor injuries to passengers and public, 1076 (17%) of which were Class 1 (the injured party went directly to hospital).
  • There were 167 recorded cases of passenger and public shock or trauma
source : https://www.rssb.co.uk/Library/risk.../annual-safety-performance-report-2017-18.pdf

Public fatalities

There were 337 public fatalities in 2017-18 Up 9.1% compared to 2016-17 of which 45 were non-suicide fatalities and 292 were suicide or suspected suicide fatalities (249 on mainline and 43 on London Underground)

Source : http://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0016/39103/rail-safety-statistics-2017-18.pdf

• Thirty-six people were engaged in trespass at the time of the accident.
• Six people were users of level crossings; four pedestrian users and two road vehicle occupants.
• The remaining two people were at stations.

source : https://www.rssb.co.uk/Library/risk.../annual-safety-performance-report-2017-18.pdf
 
Last edited:

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
My reading of the press release is that ARN again did not agree to meet to capitulate. Read it carefully and sceptically, https://www.rmt.org.uk/news/40th-day-of-rmt-northern-rail-action-goes-ahead/ it does not even clearly state that they have asked ARN again, it just leaves you with that impression. Very carefully written to given an impression without actually confirming anything but their own position.

And of course from Arriva's prospective discussions with the RMT (over guards) should have started after discussions with ASLEF were in progress, no point in agreeing a change with the RMT only to have to change it all because ASLEF don't like what has been agreed.

Also notice it says

Mick Cash said:
It's time for Arriva Rail North to stop taking instructions from this collapsing government

So the RMT are effectively saying Arriva should pick and choose which franchise requirements they follow and which they don't bother with - that's a very dangerous suggestion from Mick Cash and one he must retract if he has any sense at all.
 

coppercapped

Established Member
Joined
13 Sep 2015
Messages
3,094
Location
Reading
Yes. But there are other, fuller, statistics available.
It is true that we have a very safe system generally, which is why I'm not sure why I, and my fellow passengers are being expected to endure such a large level of disruptive industrial action over a change which will involve no reduction in headcount anyway, as second persons are acknowledged to be needed on the trains in Northern land, and little, if any improvement in safety.
Ask Mr Cash. I'm sure he has a 'sloganised' answer.
 

Robertj21a

On Moderation
Joined
22 Sep 2013
Messages
7,518
I wouldn't mind betting that those people aren't the ones having to put up with never ending industrial action. For a compromise to work it has to be agreed by both sides, and I would rather they agreed a compromise that works, such as the Scotrail solution, rather than some fantasy that will just result in further strikes.


It doesn't really need any compromise, it needs the RMT to be more realistic and agree to discuss matters without their blanket pre-conditions.
 

Robertj21a

On Moderation
Joined
22 Sep 2013
Messages
7,518
It is true that we have a very safe system generally, which is why I'm not sure why I, and my fellow passengers are being expected to endure such a large level of disruptive industrial action over a change which will involve no reduction in headcount anyway, as second persons are acknowledged to be needed on the trains in Northern land, and little, if any improvement in safety.


If there's no reduction in headcount and little, if any, improvement in safety then why are the RMT being so unco-operative ?
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,541
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
So the RMT are effectively saying Arriva should pick and choose which franchise requirements they follow and which they don't bother with - that's a very dangerous suggestion from Mick Cash and one he must retract if he has any sense at all.

It's not dangerous, as the TOC cannot and will not follow it. It's just rubbish and makes him out to be an idiot.
 

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
It's not dangerous, as the TOC cannot and will not follow it. It's just rubbish and makes him out to be an idiot.

A TOC can end up breaking their franchise commitments though and I'm sure Mick Cash will be one of the first to complain when that happens.
 

scrapy

Established Member
Joined
15 Dec 2008
Messages
2,081
A TOC can end up breaking their franchise commitments though and I'm sure Mick Cash will be one of the first to complain when that happens.
Don't Northern already pick and choose what franchise commitments they wish to forfill?

Certainly their service levels on many routes don't meet the franchise spec and even after taking into account delays to electrification several routes don't get the Sunday services they should and that's without the 'planned cancellations'.

What about the promised boxing day services from 2018? They are required to run 60 services this boxing day. Are they going to do it? I've certainly seen no publicity.

I can understand Mick Cash being a bit miffed that Northern say they cant break the franchise agreement for DCO but break others as they please.
 

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
Don't Northern already pick and choose what franchise commitments they wish to forfill?

Certainly their service levels on many routes don't meet the franchise spec and even after taking into account delays to electrification several routes don't get the Sunday services they should and that's without the 'planned cancellations'.

What about the promised boxing day services from 2018? They are required to run 60 services this boxing day. Are they going to do it? I've certainly seen no publicity.

I can understand Mick Cash being a bit miffed that Northern say they cant break the franchise agreement for DCO but break others as they please.

How many of the franchise requirements you mention have been cancelled altogether, opposed to delayed?

If DCO starts in 2020 or 2021 instead of 2019 you could say it falls in to the same category as additional Sunday services currently being missing on some routes. (Presuming the 195s and 331s are available for service in 2019.)
 

Meerkat

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2018
Messages
7,420
The argument that there is no saving is short term. Presumably Only the current guards get to keep their T&Cs, new bods will be recruited as cheaper OBSs.
And the RMT’s own statements show the big picture - they claim capitulation by other TOCs as the standard, and therefore they have to be ‘broken’ for there to be future progress anywhere, about anything.
 

XDM

Member
Joined
9 Apr 2016
Messages
483
If there's no reduction in headcount and little, if any, improvement in safety then why are the RMT being so unco-operative ?

RMT Rule 4b
The union & its members are dedicated to the destruction of private companies & their replacement by a socialist society.
Northern, Southern & SWR are run by private companies.
 

Gems

Member
Joined
10 Nov 2018
Messages
656
I am currently sat on a frequently stopping guard operated 142 Northern service. Having just timed the dwell time at stations we were stopped for between 30 seconds and 40 seconds at the last five stops. The time between the all doors except the local closing and the train moving was between 6 and 10 seconds with one exception where the driver seemed slow to react and it took slightly longer (16sec). How you can save 20-40 seconds with dco I don't know?
LOL. It is all in the minds of the accountants and others who think they know it all, but know nothing.

Lets all play with seconds, of course what happens when those seconds are up, do we just shut the doors on anyone left on the platform yet to board? Do we carry the elderly who are a bit slow to get off to the next stop and hope they are quicker. What about wheelchairs, bikes, and great aunt Gerty with the wooden leg.
What about the driver who is rustling around in his bag for a snack whilst at the station? What about doors that are slow to close? Or people who insist on congregating around the doors blocking others from getting on?

You see the trouble with many posters here is this. You mean well, but the railway to you is all working timetables and what should happen. You need to add the human factor, and the problem with arguments about dwell times is the human factor has been stripped away.
 

Gems

Member
Joined
10 Nov 2018
Messages
656
The argument that there is no saving is short term. Presumably Only the current guards get to keep their T&Cs, new bods will be recruited as cheaper OBSs.
And the RMT’s own statements show the big picture - they claim capitulation by other TOCs as the standard, and therefore they have to be ‘broken’ for there to be future progress anywhere, about anything.
And when they have been broken will your fares come down? Do you like paying more for less?
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,824
Location
Yorks
If there's no reduction in headcount and little, if any, improvement in safety then why are the RMT being so unco-operative ?

I don't hold any candle for the RMT.

All I'm saying is, why not accept that there might as well be a second person on every train (as there will be on most), then we can see where we are with what that person does. A sensible solution such as driver open/guard close might develop.
 
Last edited:

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,824
Location
Yorks
The argument that there is no saving is short term. Presumably Only the current guards get to keep their T&Cs, new bods will be recruited as cheaper OBSs.
And the RMT’s own statements show the big picture - they claim capitulation by other TOCs as the standard, and therefore they have to be ‘broken’ for there to be future progress anywhere, about anything.

I couldn't give a fig about your 'big picture' no doubt while you're sitting in a leafy suburb with a full train service. No doubt there are some swivel-eyed Thatcherites who get all excited at the thought of breaking a union, but the majority just want a compromise to enable the trains to run better. Driver open/guard close would be ideal for the types of routes operated by Northern.
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
67,439
Location
Yorkshire
I couldn't give a fig about your 'big picture' no doubt while you're sitting in a leafy suburb with a full train service. No doubt there are some swivel-eyed Thatcherites who get all excited at the thought of breaking a union, but the majority just want a compromise to enable the trains to run better. Driver open/guard close would be ideal for the types of routes operated by Northern.
I completely disagree. The RMT need to be defeated otherwise we will keep getting these problems. Nothing wrong with the way the Glasgow are electrics run, that's what we need

To be fair, it isn't Mr Cash who is proposing the change.
Ludicrous. Mr Cash claims trains in Glasgow, London etc are unsafe . He is an enemy of rail travel as a mode, and an enemy of yours.

I don't hold any candle for the RMT.
Then don't pander to them.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,824
Location
Yorks
I completely disagree. The RMT need to be defeated otherwise we will keep getting these problems. Nothing wrong with the way the Glasgow are electrics run, that's what we need

I'm afraid we will have to disagree. If someone want's to do battle with the RMT, let them do it elsewhere. Why do I have to endure a non-existant train service over what a second person does, where even the local transport authority TfN acknowledges that there should be a second person on all trains.

If a local transport authority decides that they don't need a second person on all trains, let them have the arguments and suffer the strikes, not me.
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
67,439
Location
Yorkshire
And when they have been broken will your fares come down? Do you like paying more for less?
The increase in efficiency tends to reduce subsidy rather than fares. Don't fall for the RMTs propaganda.

The Strathclyde model is more efficient, as staff spend more time collecting fares.

I'm afraid we will have to disagree. If someone want's to do battle with the RMT, let them do it elsewhere. Why do I have to endure a non-existant train service over what a second person does, where even the local transport authority TfN acknowledges that there should be a second person on all trains.

If a local transport authority decides that they don't need a second person on all trains, let them have the arguments and suffer the strikes, not me.
By that warped logic no changes should ever be made in case the RMT kick off. Your proposals will just encourage them even more!
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
67,439
Location
Yorkshire
LOL. It is all in the minds of the accountants and others who think they know it all, but know nothing.

Lets all play with seconds, of course what happens when those seconds are up, do we just shut the doors on anyone left on the platform yet to board? Do we carry the elderly who are a bit slow to get off to the next stop and hope they are quicker. What about wheelchairs, bikes, and great aunt Gerty with the wooden leg.
What about the driver who is rustling around in his bag for a snack whilst at the station? What about doors that are slow to close? Or people who insist on congregating around the doors blocking others from getting on?

You see the trouble with many posters here is this. You mean well, but the railway to you is all working timetables and what should happen. You need to add the human factor, and the problem with arguments about dwell times is the human factor has been stripped away.
I have only once had a train door closed on me when it shouldn't have been, and it was an SWR service at Clapham Junction with a Guard, so this argument holds no water as far as I'm concerned. I've taken many DOO trains, and not had that. So this suggestion that a Guard avoids this is wrong because I know my experience proves otherwise.

The fact is DOO has been around for over 30 years and our railways are far safer than almost any other mode of transport.

As for people making it difficult for others to get on, how is one Guard going to prevent that on a 12 car train? It happens every Saturday night at York , and all those trains have Guards.

Recycling the same arguements achieves nothing but if people keep making them I'm going to have to keep rebutting them. I'd rather not have to bother!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top