Temporary Timetable 13th Dec - 7th Jan

[HamworthyGoods]

Given that 0700-1800 will knacker most commuters anyway so they'll seek alternatives, I half wonder if 1200-end of service would be a better plan. That'd stop basically every work Christmas do getting cancelled.

With the road haulage industry still struggling I would have thought the times that best suit freight traffic would be chosen as this is harder to transport by alternative means.

 

[HSTEd]

Whilst I'd tend to agree with you, one of the major issues with shortened signal box opening hours, is that should a box open at 07:00, trains wouldn't necessarily start running straight away, as it may be that the first of a convoy of trains can only leave the depot at 07:05. Trains would then have to travel empty to their origin stations before starting in passenger service.

In a similar situation to the morning following industrial action, should a station be at the end of the line or a distance from depot, it may be several hours after the initial 07:00 start time before some stations receive their first train.

A similar situation (but in reverse) occurs if all trains have to be at thier final stabling location by 19:00. With allowances for delays, etc. some stations see their last services really quite early.

From a passenger perspective, if what has been suggested happens, and unless you're flexible and only making short journeys, it's liable to become a bit of a challenge to use the railway.

It is likely that aggressive outstabling of stock will be necessary.

Drivers will likely be taxi'd to trains scattered all over the shop to ensure that all trains can start moving at 0700. With the reduction in number of trains operating overall you can afford to be a little less hyper-optimised with driver and stock diagramming.

 

[Horizon22]

The NRP is also very clear that the company can’t change base rosters (i.e. the normal repeating cycle of booked shifts and rest days that signallers work every week) unilaterally without negotiation and agreement with the union at local and - if they fail to agree - regional level. I‘m sure they will try this but it will escalate the dispute dramatically. We’ll find out soon enough.

Probably being agreed at regional level then, if it forms part of the agreed overtime ban and this is a response to it.

Whilst I'd tend to agree with you, one of the major issues with shortened signal box opening hours, is that should a box open at 07:00, trains wouldn't necessarily start running straight away, as it may be that the first of a convoy of trains can only leave the depot at 07:05. Trains would then have to travel empty to their origin stations before starting in passenger service.

In a similar situation to the morning following industrial action, should a station be at the end of the line or a distance from depot, it may be several hours after the initial 07:00 start time before some stations receive their first train.

A similar situation (but in reverse) occurs if all trains have to be at thier final stabling location by 19:00. With allowances for delays, etc. some stations see their last services really quite early.

From a passenger perspective, if what has been suggested happens, and unless you're flexible and only making short journeys, it's liable to become a bit of a challenge to use the railway.

Of course, but as you say on the other hand trains might need to leave London terminals far before 1700 to be put to bed in time; already on the current strike days even metro / stopping services tend to depart London terminals at the latest of 1745. You’d have to push that back an hour.

On the other hand most “9-5 workers” in the local urban catchment area aren’t getting trains at 0630 or 0700, so that time is more “wasted”.

Whatever we discuss, both options are fairly terrible regardless for passengers overall of course.

 

[Starmill]

It is likely that aggressive outstabling of stock will be necessary.

Drivers will likely be taxi'd to trains scattered all over the shop to ensure that all trains can start moving at 0700. With the reduction in number of trains operating overall you can afford to be a little less hyper-optimised with driver and stock diagramming.

There's lots of extra cost involved in this for cleaning, taxis and difficulty with security. Why would they bother when they can just have first trains around 0800 - 0900 instead?

 

[Bletchleyite]

There's lots of extra cost involved in this for cleaning, taxis and difficulty with security. Why would they bother when they can just have first trains around 0800 - 0900 instead?

Because if first trains are around 0900, then they might as well run nothing.

 

[YorkshireBear]

I think we all know now that this is going to happen. I have heard it from so many independent sources now that clearly the planning is at an advanced stage. The news last night shows that we are still so far from an agreement this isn't going to to end before hand.

Because if first trains are around 0900, then they might as well run nothing.

With government paying costs who cares?

 

[Bertie the bus]

With government paying costs who cares?

People who work on the railway should for a start. The worse the railway's finances get the less chance of any reasonable offer being made.

 

[JonathanH]

There's lots of extra cost involved in this for cleaning, taxis and difficulty with security. Why would they bother when they can just have first trains around 0800 - 0900 instead?

Because if first trains are around 0900, then they might as well run nothing.

First trains at 0800 has been very problematic at some locations with overcrowding for the first trains. 0900 might be better or worse depending on how many people still bother to travel.

 

[infobleep]

Would it be possible to have longer sections between signal boxes by switching some of them out or would it be too much work for the planning teams?

I got the idea from the following disruption notice that appeared on the Guildford live departure board on the National Rail Enquiries today.

Trains running between Blackwater and North Camp may be delayed by up to 10 minutes due to signalling staff being taken ill between these stations.

 

[yorksrob]

Still no news of the emergency timetable on the mainstream media. When will they cotton on .....

 

[Goldfish62]

Still no news of the emergency timetable on the mainstream media. When will they cotton on .....

Surely we have to await to see what the RMT's response is to the NR offer. The National Executive is meeting today to consider it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Surely we have to await to see what the RMT's response is to the NR offer. The National Executive is meeting today to consider it.

Is the NR offer more reasonable than the obvious trolling being done with the TOC offer?

(I mean, I'm not anti DOO, but putting it in that offer guaranteed it would never be accepted)

 

[Goldfish62]

Is the NR offer more reasonable than the obvious trolling being done with the TOC offer?

(I mean, I'm not anti DOO, but putting it in that offer guaranteed it would never be accepted)

Lynch in his email to members didn't slag it off like he did with the RDG offer and the fact it hasn't yet been rejected would all imply that it's more reasonable, yes.

 

[The Planner]

Would it be possible to have longer sections between signal boxes by switching some of them out or would it be too much work for the planning teams?

I got the idea from the following disruption notice that appeared on the Guildford live departure board on the National Rail Enquiries today.

View attachment 124787

Depends if the boxes can switch out, that isn't a given.

 

[yorksrob]

Surely we have to await to see what the RMT's response is to the NR offer. The National Executive is meeting today to consider it.

Given where we're around a week away from its implementation, I'm surprised the public are blissfully unaware of the consequences if an agreement isn't reached.

 

[HSTEd]

There's lots of extra cost involved in this for cleaning, taxis and difficulty with security. Why would they bother when they can just have first trains around 0800 - 0900 instead?

The cost to the government of those extra costs will be nothing compared to the loss of farebox from the later start.

I know you think the government are doing this because they are evil, but do you think the Treasury would let them leave money on the table?

 

[YorkshireBear]

People who work on the railway should for a start. The worse the railway's finances get the less chance of any reasonable offer being made.

I was being tounge in cheek . The TOC management won't care is all I meant when their costs are covered and they don't get revenue.

 

[craigybagel]

Would it be possible to have longer sections between signal boxes by switching some of them out or would it be too much work for the planning teams?

I got the idea from the following disruption notice that appeared on the Guildford live departure board on the National Rail Enquiries today.

View attachment 124787

Depends if the boxes can switch out, that isn't a given.

My core route has a section with 18 consecutive signal boxes with mechanical signalling. All bar 1 are absolute block in at least one direction. Of those 18, only 3 can be switched out. If any single one of the others closes, the line ends up blocked.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

My core route has a section with 18 consecutive signal boxes with mechanical signalling. All bar 1 are absolute block in at least one direction. Of those 18, only 3 can be switched out. If any single one of the others closes, the line ends up blocked.

That must the last bastion of mechanical signalling in the UK with that many consecutive boxes.

 

[The Planner]

That must the last bastion of mechanical signalling in the UK with that many consecutive boxes.

Marches, Cumbrian Coast all fit into that.

 

[D6130]

Marches, Cumbrian Coast all fit into that.

I believe that the OP was referring to the Marches line.

 

[Peter Sarf]

It’s no worse than Truss mentioning striking rail staff something like four times in her final PMQs.

When you’ve just trashed an economy, caused a crisis with mortgages and pensions, wiped double-figure percentages off share values and caused the currency to plunge at a time of high inflation, yeah striking rail staff is really the big evil.

No wonder they’re all lining up not to contest the next election, the problem is the country (again) ends up screwed because Labour have their own issues, not least having been wildly supportive of the extended lockdowns which have caused much of all this trouble, and handing them a blank cheque (which a landslide victory will do) isn’t a good outcome for the country either.

In short, this whole country is screwed. This is the consequence of the gradual but sustained drying up of political talent over the last two to three decades. Here we are, the tank has run dry.



So, am I understanding right that the plan is to move staff to give full coverage for the day shift, and run with a skeleton staff on the night shift to cover possessions and such. And presumably close altogether small boxes on nights which would result in sections of line having to be shut?

Yes. Politicians have done very little to reinforce peoples belief in Democracy. Putin will be pleased.

Is the NR offer more reasonable than the obvious trolling being done with the TOC offer?

(I mean, I'm not anti DOO, but putting it in that offer guaranteed it would never be accepted)

The D** word. When will cease to be a bone of contention, I have not noticed many problems with it.

 

[Goldfish62]

Given where we're around a week away from its implementation, I'm surprised the public are blissfully unaware of the consequences if an agreement isn't reached.

I don't think you can blame anyone. I'm only aware because I've picked up on this thread.

Most people will think it's just the usual non-service on strike days and a bit of disruption here and there during the overtime ban.

 

[InkyScrolls]

The D** word. When will cease to be a bone of contention, I have not noticed many problems with it.

The thousands of conductors facing potential redundancy would disagree.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The thousands of conductors facing potential redundancy would disagree.

There are ways it could be introduced over a period without anyone being made redundant, given that there are places where you'd want OBS type roles and given that the railway is heavily understaffed anyway in terms of too much running on overtime.

 

[yorksrob]

I don't think you can blame anyone. I'm only aware because I've picked up on this thread.

Most people will think it's just the usual non-service on strike days and a bit of disruption here and there during the overtime ban.

As I've said before, I'm surprised the mainstream media haven't noticed it.

 

[Peter Sarf]

The thousands of conductors facing potential redundancy would disagree.

There are ways it could be introduced over a period without anyone being made redundant, given that there are places where you'd want OBS type roles and given that the railway is heavily understaffed anyway in terms of too much running on overtime.

That is what I would hope for. I would add that I think a number of drivers started as guards so that would be a useful re-deployment for a number of guards (I know it takes time and training but we do seem to be rather short of drivers). The main thing would be allowing a (suitable) train to run if a guard was missing - not wiping out all the guards.

 

[Goldfish62]

Let us please move away from DOO discussions. They don't end well...

 

[LowLevel]

There are ways it could be introduced over a period without anyone being made redundant, given that there are places where you'd want OBS type roles and given that the railway is heavily understaffed anyway in terms of too much running on overtime.

Doesn't make it anymore satisfactory. I enjoy being a guard. It's a nice mix of challenges with some operational duties and managing people. Without wishing to blow my own trumpet, I'm excellent at both elements and my service record reflects that. I have no real concerns at ending up without a job in the end, but I do worry about paying my mortgage and my own satisfaction with my existence.

As I see it I have two options.

1. Become a train driver. Go through a horrifically stressful application process when my mental health is already under siege with no guarantee of success. Eventually land on a better wage, having taken a cut through training and a period of mostly night work trundling around a station/depot at walking pace. Say goodbye, largely, to the genuine pleasure of interacting with the public and sorting out their problems which I relish.

2. Resign myself to becoming a mobile customer service assistant at some point. Lose control of my own train and become subservient to the driver, with the potential for being left behind by the damn thing if the company deems it convenient. Lose my safety critical status and probably become subject to a horrible roster. Lose the satisfaction of managing operational challenges. Get left carrying the can regarding holding the fort if the train kills someone or has some other mishap when I'm working on it anyway. Accept that my wage at the best will be frozen for years until the replacement grade catches up. In all probability significantly reduce my satisfaction in dealing with the public by moving to a more conflict based revenue protection role most likely involving trying to extract penalty fares, rather than the positive I make it now.

I suppose the nuclear option is 3, leave - but then do what? I'm doing what I always wanted to do.

 

[ashkeba]

Is this why I can't find any daytime trains to Royston on 23 December?