• 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!

Northern writing to ACAS requesting independent inquiry

Status
Not open for further replies.

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
29,323
Location
Fenny Stratford
Sure they can strike if there is a genuine reason but there is not since their jobs are safe. Moreover they are not prepared to talk, hence they are not really trying to do their jobs.

Who decides what a genuine reason is? You? The RMT members freely voted for a strike over these changes. It was their democratic decision. They seem to think it is a genuine reason for a strike. They aren't doing this for the lol's!

BTW The final sentence entirely proves my point above! Hook line and sinker.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

ainsworth74

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
27,717
Location
Redcar
I wonder if the difference in feeling between depots in terms of their level of support for the strike is yet another example of the East/West split in this franchise? My impression has always been that morale and industrial relations are higher/better overall on the East side of the operation than they are on the West. I could well believe that West side depots are much more likely to be fully behind the strike come hell or high water than East side depots. Certainly the two pickets that I've seen (one at Middlesbrough and one at Hull) were hardly what you'd call well attended (you could count the participants on one hand) and whilst they're not the biggest depots ever if it was well supported you'd expect to see a few more people out than that!
 

DaveB10780

Member
Joined
10 Sep 2015
Messages
210
Who decides what a genuine reason is? You? The RMT members freely voted for a strike over these changes. It was their democratic decision. They seem to think it is a genuine reason for a strike. They aren't doing this for the lol's!

BTW The final sentence entirely proves my point above! Hook line and sinker.
In that case do it properly and ramp up the strike days. Saturdays hurt the strikers the least it would seem and sadly have become "normality".
 

gazzaa2

Member
Joined
2 May 2018
Messages
833
In that case do it properly and ramp up the strike days. Saturdays hurt the strikers the least it would seem and sadly have become "normality".

It doesn't seem to bother them at all, yet they aren't committed enough to strike through the week.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,990
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
They are on stirke..........................

if your view is that people working on the railway should not be allowed to strike I just say so.

TBH I do think they should only be allowed to strike for matters directly affecting them, not for a theoretical future role that none of them will likely have to do. Northern guaranteeing all present guards the guard's role as is for the remainder of the franchise is about all they reasonably can do, and that is guaranteed, pretty much, by simple virtue of the amount of non-DOO Class 15x and 319[1] stock in use and there being no money for a total fleet replacement.

[1] I know they *were* DOO but that was with mirrors and there's no plan to fit those, and cameras would probably be out of gauge due to the square body profile.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,990
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
It doesn't seem to bother them at all, yet they aren't committed enough to strike through the week.

Yes, as I said above if they went "all out", i.e. down tools until there is a resolution to their satisfaction, then there would be much more chance of one.

The Saturday thing neither hurts Northern nor the staff so it can go on for as long as it wants. It only hurts the passenger.
 

CaptainHaddock

Established Member
Joined
10 Feb 2011
Messages
2,216
Yes, as I said above if they went "all out", i.e. down tools until there is a resolution to their satisfaction, then there would be much more chance of one.

The Saturday thing neither hurts Northern nor the staff so it can go on for as long as it wants. It only hurts the passenger.

Well if the RMT won't change tactics then perhaps Northern should. For example how about refusing to offer overtime each week to any employee who's taken part in a strike the previous Saturday? At present it seems Northern guards can make up any pay lost on Saturdays by working overtime on Sundays, so if that were taken away from them they might think twice about striking
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,990
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Well if the RMT won't change tactics then perhaps Northern should. For example how about refusing to offer overtime each week to any employee who's taken part in a strike the previous Saturday? At present it seems Northern guards can make up any pay lost on Saturdays by working overtime on Sundays, so if that were taken away from them they might think twice about striking

Yes, I have wondered why Northern don't institute an overtime ban, making things harder for the strikers as they then would be on 4/5 pay. Maybe they don't want the publicity issue of there being no service on a Sunday either - at least at the moment many Saturday activities like shopping or a bimble in the Peak can be done on Sunday instead.
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
29,323
Location
Fenny Stratford
Well if the RMT won't change tactics then perhaps Northern should. For example how about refusing to offer overtime each week to any employee who's taken part in a strike the previous Saturday? At present it seems Northern guards can make up any pay lost on Saturdays by working overtime on Sundays, so if that were taken away from them they might think twice about striking

Yes, I have wondered why Northern don't institute an overtime ban, making things harder for the strikers as they then would be on 4/5 pay. Maybe they don't want the publicity issue of there being no service on a Sunday either - at least at the moment many Saturday activities like shopping or a bimble in the Peak can be done on Sunday instead.

Will the service not collapse totally then? That would shift the spotlight on to issues with Arriva rather than issues with the RMT? Notice how they are being very quiet about Sunday issues. There are no strikes on Sundays. Why cant they run a proper service?

TBH I do think they should only be allowed to strike for matters directly affecting them, not for a theoretical future role that none of them will likely have to do.

So they can only strike once an issue has occurred and they have all been sacked? really? How does that work?
 

Robertj21a

On Moderation
Joined
22 Sep 2013
Messages
7,520
"Management" ( hate that term but not sure what else to use) in my experience use every opportunity in disputes like this to pump out their message. It is all part of the grinding down by showing what the future sunlit uplands will look like. It is strange they are not doing that. They are missing a chance to land a message with a captive audience.

BTW - how could the RMT move this forward? By the same token do you agree the DfT/Arriva could move this forward but chose not to?

Oh yes, I quite agree that it's unusual for there to be no hyped-up message of 'what might be'. However, with a firmly entrenched RMT, they might just feel that it would do more harm than good (or simply not worth them bothering given the DfT role behind it all). It would also publicise what they may wish to keep under wraps until there are proper negotiations. They have already reassured staff that there will be no redundancies - albeit with, seemingly, little response from the RMT. My personal view is that they should have held back on that.

Of course Arriva could move things forward, by simply agreeing to more demands from the RMT, but I'm not sure that giving in to what some may consider to be a form of blackmail is a route that any respectable company should consider. The RMT could also move things forward very quickly and easily by negotiating without their standard pre-conditions of a safety-critical guard on every train. That way forward has been available to the RMT throughout, but they still prefer to cause problems for the travelling public, and their own members, by routine strikes. I would have thought that 45 strikes with no discernible changes resulting should have convinced any union leader that they are wasting their time.
 
Last edited:

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
39,077
Location
Yorks
Oh yes, I quite agree that it's unusual for there to be no hyped-up message of 'what might be'. However, with a firmly entrenched RMT, they might just feel that it would do more harm than good (or simply not worth them bothering given the DfT role behind it all). It would also publicise what they my wish to keep under wraps until there are proper negotiations. They have already reassured staff that there will be no redundancies - albeit with, seemingly, little response from the RMT. My personal view is that they should have held back on that.

Of course Arriva could move things forward, by simply agreeing to more demands from the RMT, but I'm not sure that giving in to what some may consider to be a form of blackmail is a route that any respectable company should consider. The RMT could also move things forward very quickly and easily by negotiating without their standard pre-conditions of a safety-critical guard on every train. That way forward has been available to the RMT throughout, but they still prefer to cause problems for the travelling public, and their own members, by routine strikes. I would have thought that 45 strikes with no discernible changes resulting should have convinced any union leader that they are wasting their time.

I strongly suspect that Northern and the RMT would have reached agreement donkeys years ago, were it not for the machinations of the DfT, which would have resulted in having a train service - which is the important thing, not meaningless drivel about 'blackmail' from Unions.

If it is of such vital National importance that we 'beat' the unions, how come it is only Northern passengers who are required to sacrifice their journeys, and their customers, who are required to sacrifice their businesses, for this great cause, rather than passengers and businesses in other areas such as Scotland, Anglia and Merseyside.
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
29,323
Location
Fenny Stratford
The RMT could also move things forward very quickly and easily by negotiating without their standard pre-conditions of a safety-critical guard on every train.

but that is the central point of the argument: 2 safety critical people on the train! Your argument seems to be RMT should simply accept the change and ask nicely if the "management" could avoid screwing their members. We need to be sensible and realistic here.

They have already reassured staff that there will be no redundancies - albeit with, seemingly, little response from the RMT. My personal view is that they should have held back on that.

Because the issue is about safety not redundancies. That said there is also a question about T&C related to the no redundancies promise. That seems to me to be the old "We aren't making you redundant but we expect you to work twice as long for half the money" argument.

You seem intelligent enough to understand how this game is played yet overlook the central factors. I wonder why?

EDIT - I will reiterate my position: BOTH sides need to come to negotiations with clean hands and no strings. They need to talk maturely and come to a compromise. That needs to be done without outside actors trying to drive the process and it needs to be done soon.
 
Last edited:

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,990
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
EDIT - I will reiterate my position: BOTH sides need to come to negotiations with clean hands and no strings. They need to talk maturely and come to a compromise. That needs to be done without outside actors trying to drive the process and it needs to be done soon.

I would agree with this, and I suspect said compromise, if it's going to happen, would look rather OBS-like.
 

Killingworth

Established Member
Joined
30 May 2018
Messages
4,901
Location
Sheffield
Same in the dales mate. I worked the S&C a few weeks back. Never seen anything so quiet. It truly disturbs me that people working in pubs and cafe's are at risk of losing their jobs through a lack of trade. We are eating our own here.

I'm afraid that's the nature of industrial action. A short sharp dispute is inconvenient. The longer it goes on it will have more impact on the survival of impacted small businesses than it does on the belligerent parties in the dispute.

This long Saturday withdrawal of services on the Hope Valley is certainly having an effect, although at least we're getting Sunday trains and they're probably busier as a result. It's good that an hourly Sunday service is now being provided all year round (until about 2017 it was 2 hourly in winter). However, Saturday has always been a very popular day and trains can be rammed full with back packing walkers and cyclists + shoppers for Manchester and Sheffield. There were calls for strengthened trains after passengers were left behind at Sheffield last year.

Various local bodies have been trying to promote rail access to the Peak District. The Hope Valley Rail Users Group, Friends groups at all the stations, the High Peak & Hope Valley Community Rail Partnership, Transpeak Walks, and the Folk Train to Edale.

A leaflet has just been produced to promote the line but the link shown for travelling to guided walks by train has yet to go live. We don't know what days could be safely offered. It may soon be there when other Northern priorities are resolved. The idea was to celebrate the 125th anniversary of the opening of the line for stopping passenger services in June 1894. Curiously the Peak and Northern Footpaths Society was formed in the same year and their focus was very much towards taking walkers from the Manchester side into the Peak District, mostly in those days by train.

HopeValleyLeaflet2.jpg HopeValleyLeaflet.jpg
 

Starmill

Veteran Member
Joined
18 May 2012
Messages
23,399
Location
Bolton
Yes, I have wondered why Northern don't institute an overtime ban, making things harder for the strikers as they then would be on 4/5 pay.
Presumably it would create a vast number of weekday cancellations and the withdrawal of all services on Sundays, that they'd then be on the hook to pay franchise penalties for.

How anyone thinks that would help the situation is beyond me.
 

Starmill

Veteran Member
Joined
18 May 2012
Messages
23,399
Location
Bolton
I would agree with this, and I suspect said compromise, if it's going to happen, would look rather OBS-like.
This is an assumption about what the company wants that you've posted on here maybe 10 - 15 times.

It may be a decent assumption, but it's still an assumption. We don't know what the company wants - in stark contrast to the dispute at, say Southern, they've told the public nothing.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,990
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Presumably it would create a vast number of weekday cancellations and the withdrawal of all services on Sundays, that they'd then be on the hook to pay franchise penalties for.

How anyone thinks that would help the situation is beyond me.

It would help to force strikers, who would have difficulty with the lost pay they could no longer make up by way of rest day working and overtime working, to either escalate, negotiate or pack it in.
 

Robertj21a

On Moderation
Joined
22 Sep 2013
Messages
7,520
but that is the central point of the argument: 2 safety critical people on the train! Your argument seems to be RMT should simply accept the change and ask nicely if the "management" could avoid screwing their members. We need to be sensible and realistic here.



Because the issue is about safety not redundancies. That said there is also a question about T&C related to the no redundancies promise. That seems to me to be the old "We aren't making you redundant but we expect you to work twice as long for half the money" argument.

You seem intelligent enough to understand how this game is played yet overlook the central factors. I wonder why?

EDIT - I will reiterate my position: BOTH sides need to come to negotiations with clean hands and no strings. They need to talk maturely and come to a compromise. That needs to be done without outside actors trying to drive the process and it needs to be done soon.


I hope that I'm intelligent enough to handle such matters, particularly as I've been involved in similar issues before......

I've no idea why you read my post as the RMT 'asking nicely'. I thought I'd made it quite clear that the RMT could allow negotiations to start if they just removed their blanket requirement as a pre-condition. The whole point is that proper talks need to be started. Removal of the pre-conditions might allow that. Surely, until both sides actually talk there is no point in ever expecting any resolution ?. Who knows what might flow out of such talks ?
Of course, if you're saying that the RMT will *never* accept a single train operating *anywhere* on Northern without a safety-critical guard on board then I'd agree that there's little point in even booking a room for a meeting.
Either the RMT want to talk, or not. It's largely up to them.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
39,077
Location
Yorks
Presumably it would create a vast number of weekday cancellations and the withdrawal of all services on Sundays, that they'd then be on the hook to pay franchise penalties for.

How anyone thinks that would help the situation is beyond me.

Presumably without being enough for the protagonists actually to change.
 

Robertj21a

On Moderation
Joined
22 Sep 2013
Messages
7,520
I strongly suspect that Northern and the RMT would have reached agreement donkeys years ago, were it not for the machinations of the DfT, which would have resulted in having a train service - which is the important thing, not meaningless drivel about 'blackmail' from Unions.

If it is of such vital National importance that we 'beat' the unions, how come it is only Northern passengers who are required to sacrifice their journeys, and their customers, who are required to sacrifice their businesses, for this great cause, rather than passengers and businesses in other areas such as Scotland, Anglia and Merseyside.


Thank you for your comments about 'meaningless drivel'. I trust that you won't be too surprised if I generally ignore your comments in future. I have no time for threats from any union that lives in the dark ages and revels in causing problems for others. Call it whatever you like, having a tantrum, throwing toys out of the pram, or blackmail, I'm not too concerned by whatever terminology you prefer.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
39,077
Location
Yorks
Thank you for your comments about 'meaningless drivel'. I trust that you won't be too surprised if I generally ignore your comments in future. I have no time for threats from any union that lives in the dark ages and revels in causing problems for others. Call it whatever you like, having a tantrum, throwing toys out of the pram, or blackmail, I'm not too concerned by whatever terminology you prefer.

Ignore all you like.

I've had enough of having to live without a functioning train service every Saturday, just so other people can get all excited about fighting meaningless ideological battles from the 1980's over something which will have no meaningful effect on the train service.

Have your ideological battle on your own line.
 

Killingworth

Established Member
Joined
30 May 2018
Messages
4,901
Location
Sheffield
When managing change, and it starts from teaching children, it's easy as a parent or manager to decide on the change I want.

The child or worker will usually want to carry on as now, or desire a totally different change or changes.

The management style I learned was to get the people to be changed to welcome, even ask for, the change. I can recall quite a few times when I resisted change from above, only to be told by my team that they could see it made sense, was going to happen eventually anyway so we might as well get on with it and do what we could to make it work. They were usually right, and most of the things changed we'd never ever think of going back to.

I deliberately avoid railway context. A triviality. Some may recall deeds being sealed with a seal and sealing wax - our country doctor sealed all his dispensed prescriptions that way. I can't recall when that stopped. How many resisted wearing seat belts - some may still! We used to have traffic policeman, but now have thousands of extra traffic lights. I recall sailing from Hull docks full of cargo vessels being off loaded onto barges. My car was winched aboard the ferry to Norway from North Shields, one of 5 or 6 passenger ferries then plying 3 routes from the Tyne to Scandinavia.

So many rules and operating procedures have changed. In the long run it's only possible to hold the line so far. Co-operation is better than confrontation. That saps the strength of all sides.

We need to move forward, not least because 98% of folks in the north very rarely use trains at the best of times. Getting that 2% who do increased is challenge enough already.
 

gazzaa2

Member
Joined
2 May 2018
Messages
833
Yes, as I said above if they went "all out", i.e. down tools until there is a resolution to their satisfaction, then there would be much more chance of one.

The Saturday thing neither hurts Northern nor the staff so it can go on for as long as it wants. It only hurts the passenger.

I don't really take sides in this dispute (I think they're both pathetic frankly and i'm just a fed up passenger) but i'd have more respect for the RMT/guards if they actually inconvenienced themselves a bit and started striking through the week and were prepared to take a hit. Both sides seem content with this cold war for years potentially. If the guards walked out for a week or whatever then it'd inconvenience me but it'd at least be more likely to bring things to a head and at least they'd actually be making a sacrifice for once.

Perversely the staff are actually better off with the strikes if anything because of a free Saturday with overtime perks etc to make up the money, so they're not being put out at all. They're hardly the 80s miners or requiring food banks and donations to make up for no pay.

It's just selfishness at this point until they change tact.
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
29,323
Location
Fenny Stratford
I would agree with this, and I suspect said compromise, if it's going to happen, would look rather OBS-like.

Do OBS have safety training?

I hope that I'm intelligent enough to handle such matters, particularly as I've been involved in similar issues before......

Apologies - I was being factious. I simply try to aim for even handedness. Both sides ( well actually all 3 sides of the triangle) are to blame here not just one.

I've no idea why you read my post as the RMT 'asking nicely'. I thought I'd made it quite clear that the RMT could allow negotiations to start if they just removed their blanket requirement as a pre-condition. The whole point is that proper talks need to be started. Removal of the pre-conditions might allow that. Surely, until both sides actually talk there is no point in ever expecting any resolution ?. Who knows what might flow out of such talks ?
Of course, if you're saying that the RMT will *never* accept a single train operating *anywhere* on Northern without a safety-critical guard on board then I'd agree that there's little point in even booking a room for a meeting.
Either the RMT want to talk, or not. It's largely up to them.

I agree that there should be proper talks. I agree there should be no preconditions. I hope we agree that all options should be on the table. However, I do not agree the bad behaviour is all on one side. BOTH sides must remove preconditions and talk sensibly. Both sides must offer to meet with clean hands. Both sides. It is no good making silly gestures ( as above) and then trying to spin the expected refusal. That helps no one ansd suggests the desire you assign to the employer to fix this issue is not, really, there.

I cant speak for the RMT (I am not a member or official thankfully) but my view remains that there should be 2 safety critical staff on board at all times. What their job titles and responsibilities are doesn't really bother me. I want to know that when the train hits a car on a crossing incapacitating the driver ( which is hardly beyond the realms of possibility) that there is someone on the train who knows how to secure the railway line and stop the train coming the other way then get the passengers off safely.

A bloke on minimum wage with a ticket machine and a high visibility tabard marked happy to help doesn't cut the mustard.
 
Last edited:

Starmill

Veteran Member
Joined
18 May 2012
Messages
23,399
Location
Bolton
It would help to force strikers, who would have difficulty with the lost pay they could no longer make up by way of rest day working and overtime working, to either escalate, negotiate or pack it in.
It would use us, the everyday customers, who pay for the service, as bargaining chips in an ideologically driven dispute. To this, I say no more.

People in this part of their country pay their taxes and their train fares to support the railway - they are thus entitled to receive a minimum standard of service as much as those in the rest of the country are. A semi-permenement withdrawal of some services in pursuit of this dispute isn't acceptable, and making it permanent on more days of the week only adds to the pain.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,990
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Do OBS have safety training?

...

A bloke on minimum wage with a ticket machine and a high visibility tabard marked happy to help doesn't cut the mustard.

OBS on Southern are not safety trained, though a Northern version could be if they wanted. For Southern the key flexibility gain is a lack of route learning, I believe, so any OBS can work any train (and can also work on barrier lines, station blocks etc I believe).

They are not "a bloke on minimum wage", they are actually paid more than the guards were but are worth more due to the higher flexibility.
 

Eccles1983

On Moderation
Joined
4 Sep 2016
Messages
841
Not one RMT driver at my depot has ever done a swap to get out of a strike day. They are often on the picket line. Your experience at Leeds clearly differs from most other depots.


Spot on.

This mix mash of two companies into northern hasn't worked.

The east and west depots are like chalk and cheese, and the west is definitely more militant and dare I say it old school.

Whilst the eastern depots have more guards breaking their own strikes the west is solid with one exception.

If this carries on and the RMT reballots its members I can see a massive split. Not one guard I speak to on the west is wavering. Some are ready for much more and almost wishing a week's worth of strikes.
 

Tetchytyke

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Sep 2013
Messages
13,305
Location
Isle of Man
My impression has always been that morale and industrial relations are higher/better overall on the East side of the operation than they are on the West.

There is probably less appetite for striking from Eastern guards with longer memories. The ATN guards' strike in the mid 2000s rumbled on and on and on, only for the guards to end up with a worse pay deal than they'd originally rejected.

They are not "a bloke on minimum wage", they are actually paid more than the guards were

Are they?

That sounds suspiciously like GTN bull tbh.
 
Joined
31 Jul 2010
Messages
360
OBS on Southern are not safety trained, though a Northern version could be if they wanted. For Southern the key flexibility gain is a lack of route learning, I believe, so any OBS can work any train (and can also work on barrier lines, station blocks etc I believe).

They are not "a bloke on minimum wage", they are actually paid more than the guards were but are worth more due to the higher flexibility.

Southern OBS are safety trained but not safety critical. They are trained in assisting with train evacuations, basic PTS such as what signage means and how to walk on the line (not route knowledge however), making emergency GSMR calls, stopping the train in an emergency by giving one on the bell, locking out doors, resetting pass oms and resolving basic interior faults like sliding doors, toilets etc etc. To name a few competencies.
 

Carlisle

Established Member
Joined
26 Aug 2012
Messages
4,136
Because the issue is about safety not redundancies.
It isn’t, it’s mostly about preserving the bargaining power that goes with the ability to stop the trains, I think you’ll find the majority now accept this, regardless of what side of the argument they’re actually on
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top