Arriva Rail North DOO

pt_mad said:

And one thing a computer or a camera can't do by itself is read a human. It can't read their expressions or their hesitancy or their behaviour. Humans are better at reading that. Probably another reason why driverless cars are having problems, because computer says ''person on a pavement, proceed at road speed', when in reality the person's behaviour might show another person that they are thinking about crossing the road before you get there.

Click to expand...

Precisely.

One of the reasons why it is so difficult for drivers to escape civil liability if they run someone down is because the courts expect them to take into account all surrounding circumstances eg if you see kids playing in the vicinity, slow down in case one of them dashes out. I suspect this has its railway equivalents eg what's that drunk staggering around the platform going to do if this train sets off ?

While, justifiably in my view, we expect human beings to take considerable care for the safety of others when in situations which might cause injury, we are being pushed into thinking that there is no problem with computers doing things to a lower safety standard. We are being sold a myth of unidirectional technological and social progress so that certain vested interests can make money out of this process.

Bletchleyite said:

Of course, what a computer won't do is make mistakes in the same way.

I think that's one thing that needs educating to people. People will still die under the wheels of automated cars, but there will be fewer deaths. They will just be different. Same with trains.

Click to expand...

No, there will be fewer rear-end bumps and fewer minor injury claims. Insurers will probably save money on balance, even id more people are killed or seriously injured in more serious accidents. Overall social benefit does not feature in this sort of calculus

Robertj21a said:

Surely, a path from existing guard positions to new roles is exactly the sort of thing that will be developed by TOCs (hopefully in conjunction with unions) as part of any agreement, and future T's and C's. That's what would happen in other industries and it would be nice to think that even the RMT might see the common sense in at least attempting to show some enthusiasm/co-operation.

At present, with an unnecessary dispute on their hands, and the RMT refusing to co-operate on just about anything, I doubt that any TOC is going to explain what might be possible in future. What's the point when they get nothing in return ?

I'm still not really sure that the ordinary RMT members realise what a dead-end they are being put in by their leaders.

Click to expand...

In modern Britain, whenever someone uses the word 'surely', this is usually followed by a slightly incredulous question based around the proposition that someone is doing something blindingly stupid, or not doing something blindingly obvious.

Here, it seems to me blindingly obvious that, if the rail industry wants to phase out guards, it should be trying to steer guards into the new railway roles that technological change will create, but I've not seen any sign of it doing that yet. Perhaps if the government, the DfT and the TOCs do want to do something other than throw the guards on the scrapheap, they might actually want to say something along these lines, rather than getting senior civil servants to go all Clint Eastwood on their asses

Carlisle said:

If there’s a way to just cut rail industry salaries without triggering at the very least equally destructive industrial action , I’ve not yet heard of it,

its maybe possible to streamline a few management positions, but that’ll likley have been tried already and won’t save much more .

Click to expand...

You really don't think there are any other savings which might be made in an incredibly fractured pseudo-privatised railway system ?

B&I said:

In modern Britain, whenever someone uses the word 'surely', this is usually followed by a slightly incredulous question based around the proposition that someone is doing something blindingly stupid, or not doing something blindingly obvious.

Here, it seems to me blindingly obvious that, if the rail industry wants to phase out guards, it should be trying to steer guards into the new railway roles that technological change will create, but I've not seen any sign of it doing that yet. Perhaps if the government, the DfT and the TOCs do want to do something other than throw the guards on the scrapheap, they might actually want to say something along these lines, rather than getting senior civil servants to go all Clint Eastwood on their asses

Click to expand...

You're not saying anything different.

As I thought I'd already suggested, it seems quite understandable (to me at least) that any TOC/DfT will now hold back on what may be possible given that the future is looking bleaker by the day/month/strike. Until the current dispute can be resolved (another 12 months ?) I would guess that there is little point in suggesting what *may* be possible. For all we know, the TOC/DfT may be about to lose their patience and take far more drastic action than what the RMT is expecting. In which case there is little point of thinking about a future for many of the current guards.
Why do you feel that it's only the TOC/DfT that should be seen to be doing something positive - why aren't you pushing the RMT to come out of the 1980s and show that they do, at last, have some common sense ?

B&I said:

You might call it the mask slipping. There is only one direction that certain politicians and their enablers in the civil service want to take employment conditions in this country, ans it amazes me that more people don't see this

Click to expand...

It isn't such a conspiracy. Technology is leading the charge, people not wanting the 9-5 is also significant. Tories are not as evil as you want to think. DOO is also not just a Tory thing, either. It already exists on services across the country such as the Underground, and that genie can't be put into the bottle.

PR1Berske said:

It isn't such a conspiracy. Technology is leading the charge, people not wanting the 9-5 is also significant. Tories are not as evil as you want to think. DOO is also not just a Tory thing, either. It already exists on services across the country such as the Underground, and that genie can't be put into the bottle.

Click to expand...

Do you think the race to automation is done for your benefit?

Christ, reality is going to hit some people hard.

142Pilot said:

Are we comparing ARN to the NHS or the rail industry as a whole?

It's a bit like saying a hospital trust is the NHS, where as I clearly remember Peter Wilkinson of the DfT saying he will break staff.

Click to expand...

It seems that many of the current disputes arise from the ill judged Wilkinson speech (which he may or may not now regret.)
The RMT seem to have taken this as a declaration of war which they will fight to the last man down whereas a declaration of peace would be better for all concerned.

B&I said:

Here, it seems to me blindingly obvious that, if the rail industry wants to phase out guards, it should be trying to steer guards into the new railway roles that technological change will create,

Click to expand...

I agree, rather than relying purely on certain rigorous testing regimes, proven sometimes to favour men’s brains over women’s, the industry certainly could be doing a lot more

142Pilot said:

Do you think the race to automation is done for your benefit?

Christ, reality is going to hit some people hard.

Click to expand...

Automation, like DOO, has to be delivered properly, has to be the best it can be for those who both do the job and receive the service.

Robertj21a said:

You're not saying anything different.

As I thought I'd already suggested, it seems quite understandable (to me at least) that any TOC/DfT will now hold back on what may be possible given that the future is looking bleaker by the day/month/strike. Until the current dispute can be resolved (another 12 months ?) I would guess that there is little point in suggesting what *may* be possible. For all we know, the TOC/DfT may be about to lose their patience and take far more drastic action than what the RMT is expecting. In which case there is little point of thinking about a future for many of the current guards.
Why do you feel that it's only the TOC/DfT that should be seen to be doing something positive - why aren't you pushing the RMT to come out of the 1980s and show that they do, at last, have some common sense ?

Click to expand...

You're avoiding the issue. The government, the DfT, and the TOCs have offered nothing along the lines I suggest. But when the RMT's to blame for everything, why should that matter ?

I'm arguing for a workable balance. As should have the RMT with DOO, instead of instantly falling into the "everything modern is wrong" argument.

We know DOO works, and works safely, because it has been used in the UK for nigh on 40 years. By choosing opposition, rather than building a relationship between TOC and members, the RMT has effectively sided with Betamax over downloads.

Back in the world of railways running or not on Saturdays, in Northernland here in the Hope Valley line we've none of them whether automated or not. Not a Pacer with a door system opened with an old key, push buttons and buzzers at every station, they're so quaint. I caught one tonight, standing room only as usual after a 2 hour gap! Lots of back packing young people heading out to camp in the Peak District, looking forward to a wet weekend. They mustn't have been from these parts. The old train amazed them.

The conductor hadn't left the back cab when I got off at Dore & Totley, along with about 40 others. Standing room only up to there. There's a serious need for the application of modern technology at many levels on the Hope Valley line (every station including Sheffield is open) - as everywhere else. If only the RMT would get together with Northern and work together to capture more of the lost revenue the losses would be significantly reduced. Recorded passenger numbers would rise considerably.

And here we waited in light drizzle for that late arrival into forgotten and isolated Platform 2C at Sheffield. All the Hope Valley stations now have Friends of groups. Someone should start a Friends of Platform 2C group. Northern crews working out of Manchester rarely get time to see more than this platform between cabs as they do a rapid turn around. Some passengers were waiting further down under cover.

Killingworth said:

Back in the world of railways running or not on Saturdays, in Northernland here in the Hope Valley line we've none of them whether automated or not. Not a Pacer with a door system opened with an old key, push buttons and buzzers at every station, they're so quaint. I caught one tonight, standing room only as usual after a 2 hour gap! Lots of back packing young people heading out to camp in the Peak District, looking forward to a wet weekend. They mustn't have been from these parts. The old train amazed them.

The conductor hadn't left the back cab when I got off at Dore & Totley, along with about 40 others. Standing room only up to there. There's a serious need for the application of modern technology at many levels on the Hope Valley line (every station including Sheffield is open) - as everywhere else. If only the RMT would get together with Northern and work together to capture more of the lost revenue the losses would be significantly reduced. Recorded passenger numbers would rise considerably.

And here we waited in light drizzle for that late arrival into forgotten and isolated Platform 2C at Sheffield. All the Hope Valley stations now have Friends of groups. Someone should start a Friends of Platform 2C group. Northern crews working out of Manchester rarely get time to see more than this platform between cabs as they do a rapid turn around. Some passengers were waiting further down under cover.

View attachment 55164

Click to expand...

This post speaks to me because of its realness.

No "Evil Tories must be defeated." No overblown rhetoric. No strident union language. No theatrical flourish. No left-wing thumping, no right-wing dust blowing. You speak the hear-and-now.

And it should make some people on this thread think about the fundamentals.

Revenue lost on stations. Guards hiding in cabs. Outdated technology. Clapped out trains. Passengers in the UK, in the year 2018, waiting in drizzle for the hourly spine-shaker.

So much the RMT could do. So much the DfT could do. So much the industry must do. But this thread goes around and around because the realness, the out on the platform truth of the matter, the aged stock struggling to cope, the passengers who might never return, they are all lost to hyperbole and hubris.

DOO could be the last chance solution to save the railways across an entire region. The truth in 10 or 20 or 50 years time can surely not be the reality quoted in this response.

142Pilot said:

Are we comparing ARN to the NHS or the rail industry as a whole?

It's a bit like saying a hospital trust is the NHS, where as I clearly remember Peter Wilkinson of the DfT saying he will break staff.

Click to expand...

It was your comparison. I was merely pointing out it was ridiculous. DfT is not the same as the NHS. NHS England is an independent body, at arm’s length to the government. One could hardly say that applies to DfT.

yorksrob said:

Perhaps those are exactly the "contractualised commitments" that are driving this dispute.

Click to expand...

This seems quite likely, but is completely tangential to the mistake I was attempting to clear up.

Starmill said, "I wish we had some of the redacted information about exactly what they agreed on the subsidy profile in terms of what money goes where, and exactly how they were going to get to that position vis a vis on-board and station staff". I am merely trying to point out that neither "what money goes where", nor "exactly how they [are] going to get to [a] position" are included in a Franchise Agreement.

If that is still not clear, please ask and I'll try to make it even simpler.

Firstly let me make it clear I've been a railway enthusiast for over 50 years with no political bias and I find this situation very sad. Whatever anyones views on DOO it is surely impossible to justify the current strike action. I'm sure there are RMT members on here, do any of you believe the current action is having any effect whatsoever other than resulting in the public taking their business elsewhere? Why should the public who use the railway and provide the income have to suffer? I don't expect to receive a sensible reply and am resigned to accepting that Saturday rail travel in the north of England is a thing of the past. I assume the RMT will be happy that this is the case.

DownUmmy said:

Firstly let me make it clear I've been a railway enthusiast for over 50 years with no political bias and I find this situation very sad. Whatever anyones views on DOO it is surely impossible to justify the current strike action. I'm sure there are RMT members on here, do any of you believe the current action is having any effect whatsoever other than resulting in the public taking their business elsewhere? Why should the public who use the railway and provide the income have to suffer? I don't expect to receive a sensible reply and am resigned to accepting that Saturday rail travel in the north of England is a thing of the past. I assume the RMT will be happy that this is the case.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately the RMT, and sometimes I think Northern, haven't studied marketing and the principle of marginal customers.

These are the people who aren't currently regular purchasers of the goods or services, but might be if circumstances are right. They'll use a train once in a while, but will be easily turned away by the slightest hint of bad service - and clearly by no service at all. One bad experience and they're lost for years.

More serious are the existing users who can use other modes of transport. They don't have to use trains, and once they get used to not using them they'll get used to the comfort of that car, or even a bus or taxi, slipping into new habits that don't include chancing a journey by rail.

Continuity and reliability of the service is vital in a service industry. Users aren't wanting to know about DOO's or don'ts. There are so many other factors impacting on service performance already. It's all the same to an inconvenienced passenger. Further self inflicted damage is potentially suicidal for the long term future of what should be a major growth industry.

I worked in an industry where our union did it's utmost to ensure rare industrial action impacted on the employers with minimal direct impact on customers. Strikes are the unions nuclear weapon. Once any weapon is used too often it ceases to have effect. But the union is not totally to blame for this mess, as has been repeatedly pointed out.

Harmony needs to be restored, but how, where, when, and at what cost?

Thinking as a customer, if I had to choose, with an impartial mind, whether I would like a ticket customer service person onboard or a guard with safety accreditation I must admit I'd rather have someone who's fully trained and qualified for emergencies.

Especially when we saw those instances where passengers were self evacuating without authority. I don't know what a ticket customer host would have done about that. They presumably wouldn't know the names of the lines, and the driver would have to handle it by themselves.

I have been following this thread for a while as a outside observer. Moved to put my point of view across, let me give you what I think is reasoned response from a Northern guard. Perhaps it may or may not give some insight.

Firstly. I will apologise to every passenger who is affected by these strikes. You are not the target and never have been. The reason Saturdays are chosen is very simple in it's aim, to inconvenience managers and anyone else who covers. It is a sad fact, but a fact all the same that less services run on a Saturday, and this also has been a deciding factor. When you add into the mix the reality that Saturday nights are a very different ball game to any other times regarding difficult and drunk passengers, it is not hard to understand why staff are more than happy to take a hit in the pocket and support the action.
However. I am being honest when I say it does deeply pain many of us that the person who is just wanting to travel to a Christmas market or go walking in the National Park, is inconvenienced.

So lets come to the dispute itself.
It is the devil or the deep blue sea isn't it. Who is the devil and where is the sea? Well you can take your pick. My personal view is that the problems within the RMT stem from slightly lower down the pecking order than Mick Cash. I think many of his lower ranking generals are actually a bigger problem than him. They have made some stupid and damaging decisions and I am not talking purely about the strike. They have made stupid decision about other issues as well, and I have known Mick to come to the rescue and restore a bit of common sense.

Then we have Arriva. Now Arrive took on this franchise knowing trouble was on the horizon, but they were happy to take it on. What we have here is another LNER moment. Over ambitious plans brought in far too quickly, unrealistic expectations on the outcome, and all driven by an unswerving desire to please the only customer they really care about, that being the DFT. I remember sitting in a "Proud to be Northern" group meeting and listening to a manager discussing how they didn't want the bitterness of the Southern dispute. I thought, "You really have no idea what is coming have you" This company are naive beyond belief, it is no wonder they are seeking more funding, the mismanagement is shocking. All the talent has been driven away, (Even Mr Tweeter himself Liam Sumptner is now going) although to use the word talent to describe him, I will leave that to you. But everything from new uniform to timetables has been a utter disaster.

So lets come to DCO itself now.
Yes there are possibilities where DCO is favourable, there are also many where it is not. I would hate to be a driver closing the doors on a Saturday night on a narrow platform teaming with drunks. Times like that you need a second pair of eyes, and experienced ones at that. It isn't about keeping jobs, it is about keeping vulnerable passengers safe. People do fall down the gaps, and only by physically checking like we do will you spot them. The door procedure for Northern is strict, probably more strict than people who are not guards but mere observers realise, get it wrong and you can be down the road or worse. You have no idea how many times I have wished not to have that responsibility.
Then we have disabled passengers. This is my area because I genuinely care about this group. It is not right that they should be driven off the railway, but it can also be beneficial if as a guard I could spend more time looking after them than opening doors. But we need to drop this "Some trains will run without a second person onboard" nonsense. It may come as a surprise to know that very few trains are cancelled due to a lack of guard. Where there is a lack, it is usually down to a ridiculously tight crew diagram, and these have been brought about by Northern themselves. During the 'Beast from the east' I am not aware of a single guard not turning up for work.
Likewise, I understand when people say, "Why do we need a guard if they don't come out of the back" and that would be hard to argue with. There are times when fighting yourself down a packed train is more dangerous than not, but the argument is very fluid on both counts. If something happened on that train that is full and standing, you are better having two people who know what they are doing than one overwhelmed driver. Drivers are human, and as painful as it may seem, in the event of a emergency, you as passengers are not even on their radar.
So the argument can go round and round. There are pluses and there are minuses. This dispute would melt away if the DFT just allowed a bit of slack and common sense to prevail. Northern guards are not stupid, you don't get a job like this being stupid, but we do care also. Just allow some slack so some serious talking could prevail and I'm sure reasoning would follow. We would not blindly follow the RMT if the RMT were perceived by us to be unrealistic.

I wish you all a good day.

Thanks, nice to have a sensible, well thought out, post.

One of my main concerns with this dispute is not so much the DOO/DCO argument as such but the attitude of the RMT. In particular, their *blanket* requirement for a safety-critical guard on *all* trains. They won't budge from that stance under any circumstances and yet DCO (or DOO+OBS if you prefer) appears to be operating quite successfully over many other parts of the country. The union always claims that they're available for talks - but then go in to meetings with the same pre-condition all the time.

Is it really so impossible for the RMT to even consider situations where DCO might work perfectly well ?

Well said GEMS. I'm sure those covering for your Saturday absences now know only too well what it's like at the coal face. Some can hack it, some have opted out, but all want it over even more than passengers and regular crew. To that extent it's been a shrewd RMT tactic.

Northern might as well shut down completely on Saturdays so we all know where we are. I know, that's easy for me to say on a line that's already closed down every Saturday☹

142Pilot said:

I don't think any senior NHS staff member has come out and declared war on its staff.

Click to expand...

Apologies for the late reply but it happens all the time. It is just that the NHS manages to do it in secret. Huge swathes of staff have been moved into the private sector, terms and conditions changed, jobs moved or ended. The big difference is that the NHS is a low pay employer at all levels so it is invariably short staffed, which conceals the bulk of this. You could argue this is a failure of industrial muscle, and to some extent it is. Apologies for the late reply.

a_c_skinner said:

Apologies for the late reply but it happens all the time. It is just that the NHS manages to do it in secret. Huge swathes of staff have been moved into the private sector, terms and conditions changed, jobs moved or ended. The big difference is that the NHS is a low pay employer at all levels so it is invariably short staffed, which conceals the bulk of this. You could argue this is a failure of industrial muscle, and to some extent it is. Apologies for the late reply.

Click to expand...

"Do it in secret," is hyperbolic. No public sector Union has allowed jobs to be moved in secret under their watch, I think we all know that.

pt_mad said:

Thinking as a customer, if I had to choose, with an impartial mind, whether I would like a ticket customer service person onboard or a guard with safety accreditation I must admit I'd rather have someone who's fully trained and qualified for emergencies.

Click to expand...

The problem is it's not impartial.

Does your view remain the same if having the safety critical guard means a higher fare?

B&I said:

No, there will be fewer rear-end bumps and fewer minor injury claims. Insurers will probably save money on balance, even id more people are killed or seriously injured in more serious accidents. Overall social benefit does not feature in this sort of calculus

Click to expand...

That is an incredibly depressing view and not one borne out in reality when you consider that near enough all car crashes, including serious ones, are caused by human error, not least by things like driving too close to the car in front, speeding, fiddling with the radio or whatever which an automated vehicle simply will not do.

There will not be zero deaths, but there will be a whole lot fewer.

Re Gems contribution.
Northern costs the taxpayer a huge amount of money & benefits few people.
Only a tiny percentage of travel in the region is by train.
When the trains don't run there is usually less road congestion than that caused by a minor motorway breakdown.

There is much taxpayers money to be saved by being able to insist RMT staff check tickets properly & assist passengers fully, & discipline them if they are the idle minority who don't do these tasks.
At present managers cannot easily discipline workshy guards because they can always say my platform duties come first.

Secondly, a huge reserve of spare guards, who cover for sick & non attending guards, will not have to be maintained because trains will be able to run without them if they fail to attend at short notice.

Some of the money saved can be used for on board police or security targeted on the troublesome trains gems mentions.

Some can also be spent on platform despatch to help drivers on busy platforms. These staff can also help passengers & even sweep up when they are not despatching.

This is what is done in Europe for the last 40 years & Asia for the last 20 years.

Our national prosperity & the future of our railways, potentially a wonderful form of transport, should not be dictated by pandering/surrending to the workshy, & the politically motivated, in the railway ranks.

The many guards who do their job properly should not worry.
If able, they can become drivers, team leaders or top revenue collectors - still getting 5% of what they take on top of their pay.
I know a London guard who regularly earned £900 a week each year in commission ten years ago.
He became a driver & now manages a depot of freight drivers.

Bletchleyite said:

The problem is it's not impartial.

Does your view remain the same if having the safety critical guard means a higher fare?

Click to expand...

Does anyone buy that the fare will be cheaper if the guards were removed form half of services?

Robertj21a said:

Thanks, nice to have a sensible, well thought out, post.

One of my main concerns with this dispute is not so much the DOO/DCO argument as such but the attitude of the RMT. In particular, their *blanket* requirement for a safety-critical guard on *all* trains. They won't budge from that stance under any circumstances and yet DCO (or DOO+OBS if you prefer) appears to be operating quite successfully over many other parts of the country. The union always claims that they're available for talks - but then go in to meetings with the same pre-condition all the time.

Is it really so impossible for the RMT to even consider situations where DCO might work perfectly well ?

Click to expand...

Surely that's their starting position .In the same way the PM had her Brexit starting position, Lancaster House, and then went on to bend with the plans later.

And to be fair to the RMT they are there to protect their members current jobs so they're likely to be as strict to their red lines as possible surely.