-
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
- Thread starter Andrew32
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Robertj21a
On Moderation
- Joined
- 22 Sep 2013
- Messages
- 7,520
Presumably, they'll be continuing with more strikes, even if they are proving ineffective ?
ANorthernGuard
Established Member
- Joined
- 8 Oct 2010
- Messages
- 2,662
Well we are not going to roll over that's for sure.
Surely you are not going to win so why are your leaders not sitting down with management discussing sensibly the problems ,there will still be a person on the train for passengers .You will not lose money it is said so what is the problem or is it your leadership that's the problem, if it is the members need to speak out ,after all you are a rail union not a political party.
ANorthernGuard
Established Member
- Joined
- 8 Oct 2010
- Messages
- 2,662
We have been offered "A" Job no one knows what it is. Don't believe the Tory Spin it is all about one thing...more profit. Its not about less subsidies etc. its all about more profits always has been always will be. Look at the Welsh Franchise, once Guards were Guaranteed The likes of Arriva pulled out! Not enough profit I am sure DB must be making enough from everywhere outside of Germany to keep their network running smoothly. Yes I am thourghly p**sed off with all the DO0/DCO operation is safe crap because as a very experienced Guard I have seen the dangers every day but hey as I am not as such an enthusiast (I just love the history) what do I know.
Yet the 'guard guarantee' would still allow all Valley Lines guards to be removed if light rail conversion goes ahead (and there's a strong possibly it might.) Given the lack of transparency from the Welsh government with regards to the next Wales & Borders franchise it would more surprising if none of the 4 bidders had pulled out.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Had Arriva proposed DOO on anything other than the Valley Lines?
Had they even proposed it anywhere in their unpublished bid?
LOL The Irony
On Moderation
Exactly. Probably just RMT rhetoric.
Lemmy99uk
Member
- Joined
- 5 May 2015
- Messages
- 459
Of course you don’t - Your leaders won’t meet with Arriva to talk about it!
your aware of course that Northern this week refused to meet with the RMT arent you? Not the other way round..
LOL The Irony
On Moderation
Well if you've been taken for a ride and given several massive headaches by the RMT, would you want to talk to them?
Didn't the RMT say they would only meet on condition that Northern were willing to agree to a guard on every service who closes the doors and dispatches the train?
Agent_Squash
Established Member
- Joined
- 22 Jul 2016
- Messages
- 1,233
Have you ever considered guards aren't the centre of each bid and don't really act as a make/break factor? Arriva has had to play politics with the bid for many years and may have genuine commercial reasons for not wanting to continue.
Northern is not going to invest in DCO/DOO on Sprinters/Turbostars, which means the majority of guards will have to stay anyway. The RMT is playing politics with DOO/DCO - when they deliberately go out of their way to strike on TOCs that haven't even made any mention about how it is going to be implemented or even if they want to implement it at all (a la SWR/Greater Anglia).
Following the initial RMT strike action Greater Anglia admitted that actually it does intend to have universal DCO or full DOO depending on the route having chosen not to mention that fact before. It's a new tactic by the TOCs to avoid a Southern style PR meltdown via industrial action so the RMT's way of combating it is to call them out on it and force them to declare it. Standard posturing.
SWR having dropped a clever nugget along the lines of 'our bid doesn't depend on it' to their shareholders now admit that actually they are looking at DCO for the inners.
The TOCs hope no one notices or asks difficult questions until it's too late and thus limits industrial action to the period between declaring their plans and implementation.
The RMT forces their hand into either lying (looks bad) or showing their cards early (strikes go on for far longer).
If you can't see what's going on there you're not particularly switched on.
Although, TOCs with no DOO plans still get dragged in to the dispute e.g. TPE and the RMT then tries to take credit for spending union member's fees on achieving absolutely nothing. The RMT would be better off scanning through franchise agreements and noting any sections omitted from public versions and any ambiguities and asking the relevant TOCs about them.
But when the RMT twist what TOCs say e.g. if they promise a second member of staff on board, the RMT claim they've been given a guarantee of a guard what does it matter if the TOC aren't 100% truthful, you end up with a position where neither side can be trusted and the newspapers printing a statement from the union which contradicts the statement from the TOC. Then you say strikes going on for longer, as if it's a good thing, when what the public see is their travel plans being affected because the union are throwing their toys out of the pram because they don't like a yet to be approved plan from the TOC, rather than trying to work together on the plan.
coppercapped
Established Member
Looking at the whole issue Peter Hendy, Network Rail's Chairman, had this to say in the 2018 George Bradshaw lecture:
This argument, and indeed the entire contents of the lecture, should not be disregarded because it comes from somebody on the other side of the political divide or because it is thought that the Rail Delivery Group is a waste of space and is ineffective. If any of the unions wants to be seen to be a serious player then it has to show that this argument is incorrect. Essentially what he is saying is that there is employment for life on the railways - just not a job for life. But this is true of any industry and has also been true in the past - the pace of change might have been slower but the demand for particular skills has always changed with the demands of the available technology.
The full transcript can be found here.
This argument, and indeed the entire contents of the lecture, should not be disregarded because it comes from somebody on the other side of the political divide or because it is thought that the Rail Delivery Group is a waste of space and is ineffective. If any of the unions wants to be seen to be a serious player then it has to show that this argument is incorrect. Essentially what he is saying is that there is employment for life on the railways - just not a job for life. But this is true of any industry and has also been true in the past - the pace of change might have been slower but the demand for particular skills has always changed with the demands of the available technology.
Robertj21a
On Moderation
- Joined
- 22 Sep 2013
- Messages
- 7,520
All very true, but still unlikely to be acceptable to the RMT.
LOL The Irony
On Moderation
For the RMT to accept something, there needs to be a 110% guarantee of the thing they want happening. Nothing less or they'll make a huge fuss.
I don't think that was the case. Whilst the RMT most likely open the meetings by stating exactly what they want to achieve I dont believe they refused to attend any meetings.
According to Northern, it is them who decided not to bother meeting as the talks weren't going anywhere. Northern also seem like they are pushing the RMT to reballot the guards so that the guards that are new to the role can have a vote.
a_c_skinner
Established Member
- Joined
- 21 Jun 2013
- Messages
- 1,586
All this is beside the point. The current way the dispute is being prosecuted plainly isn't effective. If the staff side cannot come up with something new the employees will continue to lose pay without a settlement. I pass no comment on the merits of the dispute, but it is unanswerable that the IA so far has achieved little.
From what I gather from your rhetoric you hate the fact that rail staff do not have to pay for their training and can get decent salaries at the end of it. When a pilot passes their training and gets their (f)ATPL they are doing so in the bid to one day be a captain. Airline captains at the major airlines earn way in excess of what drivers or guards do. I can never ever hope to achieve a salary close to what a young individual starting their commercial flight training could earn within a matter of a decade of starting their careers.
But at least we have got to the crux of your anti rail staff rhetoric. You seem to believe we are all paid too much and should pay for our training.
I used to be very pro conservatives under Cameron. I have and always will be a great believer that people who work hard should be entitled to a decent standard of living. May and many of her extreme right wing MP's have shown their support for the likes of Deliveroo and Uber companies that like to exploit their workforce. I no longer believe the Tory party stand for working people who want work hard and get on with life. If they are willing to show their support for the likes of Uber then they clearly don't believe in workers have decent pay and conditions and a decent standard of living. They clearly don't like the fact the railways still have decent pay, pensions and conditions and this is merely the first step in a massive attack on the railway workforce in general. And therefore "race to the bottom" is a cliche that seems very apt in the "modern" economy of the future, where no one is entitled to any kind of job security and should be living in a state of constant anxiety about whether they will have a job in six months time.
I have written to my MP repeatedly about how on earth ordinary people are supposed to pay to retrain and keep a roof over their heads and put food in their tables. Get the standard cut and paste reply all the time. Remember these are people who don't really have to work if they don't want to. Most could easily live day to day on their investments. When you have a PM who goes on national TV and supports the likes of Uber and Deliveroo it speaks volumes about the Government we have in right now.
Presumably, Strikes have differing effects on different lines. On the HVL between Marple and Piccadily the reduced service has proved more punctual with no short-forming and enough people scared off by the very thought of a Strike to ensure no serious overcrowding. Same as with the weather last week - at least you know where you stand before you leave home and plan accordingly. And yes, the 1705 was short-formed yet again tonight. You don't get told that on your app - or NR website lol.
I only wish that was true. With the way franchising works, the accountants and consultants assessing the way they will make money from the franchise over the life of it. Staff cutting is and always will be the easiest way to slash costs. We are seeing it all over the railway network. The only way for job numbers and salaries to be secure for the long term is for the Government to write it into franchise tenders. And as we have seen this Tory Government refuse to do that in earnest always blaming market forces and washing their hands of it calling it private company matters. I honestly don't believe the role of guards/OBS, platform staff, or booking office staff is remotely safe over the next 5-10 years which I find extremely sad having seen first hand the anxiety and stress is causing to people worrying about their livelihoods. Especially when for the most part these are just hard working people who just want to have a decent secure job and get on with life.
Last edited:
Bevan Price
Established Member
- Joined
- 22 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 7,343
I think we need to consider how much control TOCs have over the DOO situation - or are DfT and the tory government pulling the strings? (although if they are, they will probably never admit it). And if the government has involvement, the unions need to realise that - no matter how good their case might be - they will never be allowed to win.
Just think back to Thatcher v. Scargill -- he was right that in that coal mines were under threat, but failed to recognise that NUM was never going to be allowed to win - regardless of any inconvenience to the public. It is evident to me that DfT and the government don't care much about how rail users are being affected by RMT industrial action.
Just think back to Thatcher v. Scargill -- he was right that in that coal mines were under threat, but failed to recognise that NUM was never going to be allowed to win - regardless of any inconvenience to the public. It is evident to me that DfT and the government don't care much about how rail users are being affected by RMT industrial action.
Robertj21a
On Moderation
- Joined
- 22 Sep 2013
- Messages
- 7,520
Dave,
With the greatest respect, and acknowledging that you say these things quite sincerely, your continual ranting about 'hard working people who just want to have a decent job and get on with life' is wearing very thin, with me at least. It's beginning to sound far too much like the 'look at Me - Me - Me' that's all too common in this country nowadays.
Why on earth do you keep going on as if rail staff are so terribly hard done by ? Don't you think that many millions of other people living in this country also work hard and just want to have a decent job and get on with life ? Out here, in the real world, the rest of us non-rail staff have had to accept that jobs rarely exist for life, or even lengthy periods. We've also had to accept that we may need to change jobs from time to time, against our wishes. We've also recognised that we may need to move house, or gain more qualifications, or retrain to work in different industries. What makes the rail staff any different ? What is it that you feel all the rest of us should do so that rail staff can have job guarantees for, seemingly, ever and a day.
I don’t see what other option Govt/ Dft really have right now given the unions current position is so entrenched. They either keep trying in a similar manner or back down
Last edited:
And me as a civil servant. Despite being theoretically permenant most civil servants can be made redundant relatively easily, although at the cost of one months salary per year served up to a maximum of 36 months salary. I am not convinced that their will be compulsory redundancies in a growing industry. Natural wastage alone can reduce the head count by 4-5% a year even with very long lengths of service. I think some (generally older) guards really don't help the collegues through having little interest in customer service, thinking they are better than it. It really doesn't endear sympathy, I have worked around plenty of grumpy middle aged people stuck in jobs they don’t like, don't make an effort to do more than the bare minimum but that stay in them for decades for pay, pension and security. I have zero wish to support people like that. The majority of guards that actually like interaction with passengers are let down by a minority who don't seem to understand that they aren’t entitled to have things their way.
- Status