Cancelled due to ‘a short notice change to the timetable’

[londonmidland]

I was at Manchester Piccadilly this afternoon waiting for my train and I noticed several cancelled Northern services were cancelled due to ‘a short notice change to the timetable’

I recall this reason being used widely over the past year or so, however I thought we were done and dusted with it, and to instead use ‘a shortage of train crew’ or something similar?

 

[dk1]

I was at Manchester Piccadilly this afternoon waiting for my train and I noticed several cancelled Northern services were cancelled due to ‘a short notice change to the timetable’

I recall this reason being used widely over the past year or so, however I thought we were done and dusted with it, and to instead use ‘a shortage of train crew’ or something similar?

Was it ‘done and dusted with’ by Northern or just wanted by posters on this forum?

 

[Lampshade]

Northern have been diabolical today.

Whenever they say that, they're basically saying "because screw you, that's why".

 

[Moonshot]

Northern have been diabolical today.

Whenever they say that, they're basically saying "because screw you, that's why".

Well how on earth do you run a service if either a driver or guard is not available for that particular service?;

 

[Horizon22]

Well how on earth do you run a service if either a driver or guard is not available for that particular service?;

That's not the complaint. More that the reasoning being used is, effectively, nonsense.

 

[miami]

Would "cancelled because we don't want to employ enough members of staff" be acceptable?

Doesn't make much difference to the person left on the platform though. Or the person who's bought a car instead because they need reliable transport.

 

[Lampshade]

Well how on earth do you run a service if either a driver or guard is not available for that particular service?;

P-coding does not excuse bad management, own it and pay up the Delay Repay.

 

[Moonshot]

That's not the complaint. More that the reasoning being used is, effectively, nonsense.

A train cancelled at short notice?

 

[ComUtoR]

Is it allways lack of staff or potentially other reasons too ?

 

[Confused52]

It looks more like the staff are stating quite clearly that they do not want to work for Northern a minute longer than they are contractually obliged to.

 

[Moonshot]

P-coding does not excuse bad management, own it and pay up the Delay Repay.

I mentioned this in the PCoding thread that is on here......it is only going to get worse because there is no overtime being worked until further notice

It looks more like the staff are are stating quite clearly that they do not want to work for Northern a minute longer than they are contractually obliged to.

That is pretty much correct.

 

[dk1]

It looks more like the staff are are stating quite clearly that they do not want to work for Northern a minute longer than they are contractually obliged to.

That would be the same at any train operator if those up top continue to fail to adhere to agreements. We’ve seen it with LNER too and staff will not tolerate it. Just another own goal from Northern.

 

[Confused52]

That would be the same at any train operator if those up top continue to fail to adhere to agreements. We’ve seen it with LNER too and staff will not tolerate it. Just another own goal from Northern.

Why is adhering to agreements more important than running the service for the paying public? In Northern we have had years of this since before the pandemic, you cannot blame the public for being annoyed!

 

[dk1]

Why is adhering to agreements more important than running the service for the paying public? In Northern we have had years of this since before the pandemic, you cannot blame the public for being annoyed!

I’m confused by what you mean. If management run rough shot over staffing agreements then this is the end result regardless of anything else.

 

[AndrewE]

Why is adhering to agreements more important than running the service for the paying public? In Northern we have had years of this since before the pandemic, you cannot blame the public for being annoyed!

because if you (as an employer) make an agreement and then break it you cannot expect any cooperation from the people you depend on to deliver your product, train service or otherwise. I don't see how you can imagine that any goodwill will survive that. And if the employer hasn't got enough staff to deliver the service without relying on overtime (goodwill) then they are stuffed.

During the 2nd world war the railways and the staff were absolutely flogged into the ground, and their people only got their reward with nationalisation... After which (in my experience, some 30 years later) agreements were honoured. Often there wasn't a "fair" pay award and we all got poorer year on year, but generally we were all in it together, with just one deliverable and most of the time it worked.

Nowadays, with staffing cut to the bone and the bottom line (or the DfT) being the dominant driver regardless of passenger need (demand) or asset availability (think HSTs [not now] on XC and GWR) I'm not surprised that operating staff are on a very short fuse, as they know what the railway has to offer and what it could easily deliver if allowed to. Instead they are on the frontline of a government-driven austerity drive which is letting lots of punters down all over the place.

I think if I was still in it and could afford to I would just walk away from it.

 

[Confused52]

I’m confused by what you mean. If management run rough shot over staffing agreements then this is the end result regardless of anything else.

I get that to many staff it is just a job like any other and that it is not seen as a public service any more. The general public do not see it the same way, for them it is still a public service.

 

[Bow Fell]

A massive oversimplification of course but no coincidence tha the RDW agreement with Drivers expired and all of a sudden it’s back to cancellations.

It doesn’t take a genius to work out what is needed then does it?!

And of course it requires cooperation from both sides. But if you need that amount of RDW or goodwill and reliance on O/T in general to keep the job moving then somethings wrong!

I don’t agree with “short-notice change” for these cancellations, usually the practice is to cancel the unit diagram rather than the traincrew diagram because you end up with trains stranded otherwise which I’ve explained before when this cropped up last year.

For example:

Unit A comes off the depot at 0530 and runs ECS to Station A and is worked by Driver 101 and Guard 101 until 0930 between Station A and B, where they are due PNB at station B

Theres no crew for this so those services are cancelled.

Now Driver 102 and Guard 102 at a different depot which is located at Station B work it from 0945-1345 but theres no unit as the unit still on the depot near Station A.

Theres crew for this but no unit available so services remain cancelled.

So while the root cause is there was no crew, it’s a half truth as there’s traincrew but now no unit. And this is why “short-notice change to the timetable” has been used.

 

[Horizon22]

A train cancelled at short notice?

To quote - a short notice change to the timetable.

That suggests the underlining timetable has been changed.

A massive oversimplification of course but no coincidence tha the RDW agreement with Drivers expired and all of a sudden it’s back to cancellations.

It doesn’t take a genius to work out what is needed then does it?!

And of course it requires cooperation from both sides. But if you need that amount of RDW or goodwill and reliance on O/T in general to keep the job moving then somethings wrong!

I don’t agree with “short-notice change” for these cancellations, usually the practice is to cancel the unit diagram rather than the traincrew diagram because you end up with trains stranded otherwise which I’ve explained before when this cropped up last year.

For example:

Unit A comes off the depot at 0530 and runs ECS to Station A and is worked by Driver 101 and Guard 101 until 0930 between Station A and B, where they are due PNB at station B

Theres no crew for this so those services are cancelled.

Now Driver 102 and Guard 102 at a different depot which is located at Station B work it from 0945-1345 but theres no unit as the unit still on the depot near Station A.

Theres crew for this but no unit available so services remain cancelled.

So while the root cause is there was no crew, it’s a half truth as there’s traincrew but now no unit. And this is why “short-notice change to the timetable” has been used.

Just use the root cause - train crew.

 

[Bow Fell]

To quote - a short notice change to the timetable.

That suggests the underlining timetable has been changed.



Just use the root cause - train crew.

I agree, that reason should only be used in my opinion if there’s a genuine timetabling/schedule error. I imagine that reason is used is because someone wants it used and that reason is pushed via Tyrell and hence Journeycheck / CIS.

I’d never tell my staff to use it unless there were exceptional circumstances.

 

[Horizon22]

I agree, that reason should only be used in my opinion if there’s a genuine timetabling/schedule error. I imagine that reason is used is because someone wants it used and that reason is pushed via Tyrell and hence Journeycheck / CIS.

I’d never tell my staff to use it unless there were exceptional circumstances.

Oh yes, this is definitely coming from above the frontline customer information team.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I agree, that reason should only be used in my opinion if there’s a genuine timetabling/schedule error. I imagine that reason is used is because someone wants it used and that reason is pushed via Tyrell and hence Journeycheck / CIS.

I’d never tell my staff to use it unless there were exceptional circumstances.

In my observation it's pretty much always used when a service has been P-coded, regardless of TOC. It's not a reason and makes the railway look stupid - it's basically like saying "it's cancelled because it is".

 

[td97]

Is it allways lack of staff or potentially other reasons too ?

Depends on TOC, and varies between traincrew and rolling stock. Northern are always the former.
ORR publish the root cause at https://dataportal.orr.gov.uk/statistics/performance/p-coded-cancellations/

I mentioned this in the PCoding thread that is on here......it is only going to get worse because there is no overtime being worked until further notice

Northern had a very good spell around Oct/Nov 2022 with no driver RDW but minimal cancellations.
So now the change to 100+ per day must be either (or possibly both) insufficient staff to meet depot establishments or training requirements (possibly 323 related).

 

[dk1]

I get that to many staff it is just a job like any other and that it is not seen as a public service any more. The general public do not see it the same way, for them it is still a public service.

We are polar opposites in that respect. It’s not that staff don’t consider the passengers, but priority is our employment terms & conditions. We comply to our side of the bargain and management should do the same. Once they fail to do so as seems to be the case in this instance then everything else falls apart. As I said in an earlier post this seems to be a massive own goal once again. It seems to me that the more the DfT are involved the worse it gets & the two worse operators seem to be LNER & Northern. No surprises that both are operated by OLR.

 

[londonmidland]

Is there any particular reason the (awful and outdated) National Rail app fails to show a reason for cancellations and delays of service(s) in comparison to other rail apps?

Railboard is an app I use, which displays cancellation reasons and has a much better layout and format.

The pictures below show two travel apps, National Rail and Railboard, offering a different level of travel disruption information for train services from Manchester Piccadilly.

 

[Horizon22]

Is there any particular reason the (awful and outdated) National Rail app fails to show a reason for cancellations and delays of service(s) in comparison to other rail apps?

Railboard is an app I use, which displays cancellation reasons and has a much better layout and format.

Probably why!

 

[43066]

Why is adhering to agreements more important than running the service for the paying public? In Northern we have had years of this since before the pandemic, you cannot blame the public for being annoyed!

Because - obviously - if you destroy the goodwill of your workforce you won’t get any cooperation from them?! It’s very odd to try and blame the staff. If the public are annoyed it should be with northern.

 

[Moonshot]

We are polar opposites in that respect. It’s not that staff don’t consider the passengers, but priority is our employment terms & conditions. We comply to our side of the bargain and management should do the same. Once they fail to do so as seems to be the case in this instance then everything else falls apart. As I said in an earlier post this seems to be a massive own goal once again. It seems to me that the more the DfT are involved the worse it gets & the two worse operators seem to be LNER & Northern. No surprises that both are operated by OLR.

Worked far better when it was a proper franchise under Serco Abellio.

 

[Snow1964]

Because - obviously - if you destroy the goodwill of your workforce you won’t get any cooperation from them?! It’s very odd to try and blame the staff. If the public are annoyed it should be with northern.

Although to be fair, the current disputes have style of action that affects the innocent travelling public, but doesn't really have much effect on the management and owners.

So to some extent the staff are to blame for taking action of a type that affects the wrong target group. So reasonable to blame staff for their choice of action, but not principle of selected action.

Its not like they have chosen to keep serving the public, whilst targeting the management by not doing paperwork, returns, form filling, recording actions etc.

 

[Trothy]

Its not like they have chosen to keep serving the public, whilst targeting the management by not doing paperwork, returns, form filling, recording actions etc.

As has been pointed out in almost every strike thread, that type of "action" is illegal and can be punished with dismissal.

 

[robert thomas]

I get that to many staff it is just a job like any other and that it is not seen as a public service any more. The general public do not see it the same way, for them it is still a public service.

Unfortunately the present government does not see it that way