• 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 agrees deal with Aslef to ease weekend train cancellations

Status
Not open for further replies.

Gems

Member
Joined
10 Nov 2018
Messages
656
Absolutely not, on both counts.
Absolutely right on both counts.
You can't kid a kidder, and we all know many on the west are now frightened that the franchise might be split again. They know the game of holding both Arriva and the travelling public to ransom every Sunday might be challenged.
ASLEF needs challenging. They are a greedy union who would shaft other unions for a few quid more. I can't wait for the new legislation regarding strikes in the transport sector to be on the statute books.

This franchise needs splitting. Most over on the East are sick to death of those over the other side of the Pennines holding everyone hostage.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Llama

Established Member
Joined
29 Apr 2014
Messages
1,955
Most west drivers are hoping the franchise gets split.

Would you rather work an extra day during the week that pays ~£400, or an extra day on a Sunday when your family is around to spend time with, and which only pays £250?

This is the simple reason why Northern can't cover Sundays.
 
Last edited:

Exiled Lanc

Member
Joined
11 Sep 2013
Messages
9
Absolutely right on both counts.
You can't kid a kidder, and we all know many on the west are now frightened that the franchise might be split again. They know the game of holding both Arriva and the travelling public to ransom every Sunday might be challenged.
ASLEF needs challenging. They are a greedy union who would shaft other unions for a few quid more. I can't wait for the new legislation regarding strikes in the transport sector to be on the statute books.

This franchise needs splitting. Most over on the East are sick to death of those over the other side of the Pennines holding everyone hostage.
Sorry, I can't allow this to go unchallenged.
From my experience, and taking recent disputes into consideration, ASLEF is by far the more moderate of the two main rail unions and far less prone to taking strike action.
ASLEF also recommended acceptance of the original New Deal for Drivers proposal, so can't be blamed for the collapse of that either.
The three sets of T & C's within Northern, (don't forget the ex - TPE link at Barrow and Blackpool), was always going to be a major stumbling block.
You can't blame people for fighting their own corner. That's life.
 

Meerkat

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2018
Messages
7,419
You can bring new starters in on new terms but without applying the new terms until you have enough to make it practicable.
In normal businesses they will offer bonuses for old timers to switch (or pay them to leave if it makes enough difference) to speed up the transition. Though rostering systems should be able to cope.
 

Robertj21a

On Moderation
Joined
22 Sep 2013
Messages
7,518
You can bring new starters in on new terms but without applying the new terms until you have enough to make it practicable.
In normal businesses they will offer bonuses for old timers to switch (or pay them to leave if it makes enough difference) to speed up the transition. Though rostering systems should be able to cope.

Thanks. I just can't see what the real problem is, everything can be solved if the will is there!
 

Mag_seven

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
1 Sep 2014
Messages
9,994
Location
here to eternity
ASLEF is by far the more moderate of the two main rail unions and far less prone to taking strike action.

How things have changed since the 70s/80s when it ASLEF who were regarded as the militant rail union and the (then) NUR the more moderate!
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,540
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
It's always a mystery to me why a TOC doesn't use updated Terms & Conditions (including Sundays, or whatever, as necessary) for all new recruits. At least that would, eventually, ease the situation for all concerned.
No doubt I'll be told that the Unions would never allow it......

Yes, that. Personally, I think Union business is defending those in current employment in a role, and I would be in favour of legislation barring them acting in this manner. (Similarly, if a given role is to be abolished, for instance, the Union's only concern should be those who are presently in the grade, not ensuring that the grade continues in the future for anyone not presently employed in it).
 

jayah

On Moderation
Joined
18 Apr 2011
Messages
1,889
Absolutely right on both counts.
You can't kid a kidder, and we all know many on the west are now frightened that the franchise might be split again. They know the game of holding both Arriva and the travelling public to ransom every Sunday might be challenged.
ASLEF needs challenging. They are a greedy union who would shaft other unions for a few quid more. I can't wait for the new legislation regarding strikes in the transport sector to be on the statute books.

This franchise needs splitting. Most over on the East are sick to death of those over the other side of the Pennines holding everyone hostage.
It will be interesting what the Labour city mayors say about such legislation...
 

ComUtoR

Established Member
Joined
13 Dec 2013
Messages
9,399
Location
UK
Considering they allowed it at GTR and at Southeastern, it's not true to say they would never allow it.
 

jayah

On Moderation
Joined
18 Apr 2011
Messages
1,889
You can bring new starters in on new terms but without applying the new terms until you have enough to make it practicable.
In normal businesses they will offer bonuses for old timers to switch (or pay them to leave if it makes enough difference) to speed up the transition. Though rostering systems should be able to cope.
In a normal business, the antics of the RMT would make their members unemployed.
 

Geeves

Established Member
Joined
6 Jan 2009
Messages
1,912
Location
Rochdale
I wouldn't say that the railways (especially Northern) could be classed as a 'normal business' in any sense of the word. The contract was signed willingly on the premise that strikes would occur. They could not have been so blind to it.
 

LowLevel

Established Member
Joined
26 Oct 2013
Messages
7,543
Absolutely right on both counts.
You can't kid a kidder, and we all know many on the west are now frightened that the franchise might be split again. They know the game of holding both Arriva and the travelling public to ransom every Sunday might be challenged.
ASLEF needs challenging. They are a greedy union who would shaft other unions for a few quid more. I can't wait for the new legislation regarding strikes in the transport sector to be on the statute books.

This franchise needs splitting. Most over on the East are sick to death of those over the other side of the Pennines holding everyone hostage.

To be fair I think I most people for one reason or another would be quite happy to see the back of Northern in it's current unwieldy form. I spend half my life cleaning up after their inability to even attempt the advertised train service (on both sides of the company as it happens) for the many and varied reasons it collapses on a regular basis.
 

dk1

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Oct 2009
Messages
15,823
Location
East Anglia
You can bring new starters in on new terms but without applying the new terms until you have enough to make it practicable.
In normal businesses they will offer bonuses for old timers to switch (or pay them to leave if it makes enough difference) to speed up the transition. Though rostering systems should be able to cope.
It wouldn't get out of the starting block at most depots including mine. The years and years it would take to filter though and the industrial unrest it would cause would prove it totally unworkable.
 

Robertj21a

On Moderation
Joined
22 Sep 2013
Messages
7,518
It wouldn't get out of the starting block at most depots including mine. The years and years it would take to filter though and the industrial unrest it would cause would prove it totally unworkable.

Even if that were true, it would at least be a steady move forward from the current situation (which would never be allowed to exist in a proper commercial operation).
 

dk1

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Oct 2009
Messages
15,823
Location
East Anglia
Even if that were true, it would at least be a steady move forward from the current situation (which would never be allowed to exist in a proper commercial operation).
It's as true as true could possibly be. It wouldn't happen.
 

Meerkat

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2018
Messages
7,419
It's as true as true could possibly be. It wouldn't happen.
In playground terms “wotcha gonna do about it?!”
Striking over something that has no effect on the strikers would be dubious and likely to get little public support.
Might even lead to legislation to ban such action.
 

dk1

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Oct 2009
Messages
15,823
Location
East Anglia
In playground terms “wotcha gonna do about it?!”
Striking over something that has no effect on the strikers would be dubious and likely to get little public support.
Might even lead to legislation to ban such action.
Why would you want public support? They are hardly going to care about my working conditions in the same way I have no interest in theirs. Working to rule would be more than enough to cause a serious issue without resorting to strike action. There would be little reason for rocking the boat in such a way. Both management & union stick to train manning agreements & that way get along just fine.
 

scrapy

Established Member
Joined
15 Dec 2008
Messages
2,081
Sorry, I can't allow this to go unchallenged.
From my experience, and taking recent disputes into consideration, ASLEF is by far the more moderate of the two main rail unions and far less prone to taking strike action.
ASLEF also recommended acceptance of the original New Deal for Drivers proposal, so can't be blamed for the collapse of that either.
The three sets of T & C's within Northern, (don't forget the ex - TPE link at Barrow and Blackpool), was always going to be a major stumbling block.
You can't blame people for fighting their own corner. That's life.
Whilst ASLEF are far less prone to taking strike action, they can and do throw their weight around to a greater degree than the RMT. Management will go all out to prevent any action by ASLEF as with no drivers the business grinds to a complete halt so it very rarely comes anywhere near strike action as management are much more likely to take the cheque book out to avoid no trains running. ASLEF did withdraw rest days prior to the May 2018 timetable change which contributed to the chaos.

RMT (and other unions such as TSSA) have less bargaining power as a with a strike by guards a reasonable percentage of services still runs. If their other grades take action almost all services will run. Rail companies know this and are far more likely to let any dispute run to strike action rather than conceding.
 

Malcolmffc

Member
Joined
19 Mar 2017
Messages
300
Great, that’s Sunday sorted.

now they just need to make performance acceptable on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday and Saturday as well
 

dk1

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Oct 2009
Messages
15,823
Location
East Anglia
Great, that’s Sunday sorted.

now they just need to make performance acceptable on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday and Saturday as well
Thanks to the Castlefield Corridor issues that won't happen in Manchester anytime soon.
 

Meerkat

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2018
Messages
7,419
Why would you want public support? They are hardly going to care about my working conditions in the same way I have no interest in theirs. Working to rule would be more than enough to cause a serious issue without resorting to strike action. There would be little reason for rocking the boat in such a way. Both management & union stick to train manning agreements & that way get along just fine.

Because the less public support the action has the easier it is for the government to just push through (or change the rules)
Management appeasing militant unions destroyed a lot of our industry.
 

dk1

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Oct 2009
Messages
15,823
Location
East Anglia
Because the less public support the action has the easier it is for the government to just push through (or change the rules)
Management appeasing militant unions destroyed a lot of our industry.
Oh dear :rolleyes: Best end this part of the thread right now. Just like allowing new drivers to start on differing contracts it really is going nowhere.
 

scrapy

Established Member
Joined
15 Dec 2008
Messages
2,081
In playground terms “wotcha gonna do about it?!”
Striking over something that has no effect on the strikers would be dubious and likely to get little public support.
Might even lead to legislation to ban such action.
Because it is likely to have an effect on the strikers in the long term. Once more and more people are on the new contracts those on the old contracts eventually become the minority. The company then say everybody is going on the new contracts. Those already on the new contracts vote against strike action (would probably not even get to a vote) because they've nothing to gain from striking and those on the old contracts are then forced onto the new ones.

Known as divide and conquer that's why the unions are keen for everyone to be on the same contracts.
 

Meerkat

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2018
Messages
7,419
How were unions appeased in these industries and how did that destroy the industries? I'm not being funny, I genuinely don't know.
Obviously it’s not that simple but militant unions contributed hugely to inefficiencies and the terrible build quality that wasted good engineering and destroyed the competitiveness of the British car industry. Government ownership lead to political interference and moral hazard - like on the railways the unions thought the government would always keep them afloat so they didn’t need to work at keeping the companies alive.
 

Meerkat

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2018
Messages
7,419
Because it is likely to have an effect on the strikers in the long term. Once more and more people are on the new contracts those on the old contracts eventually become the minority. The company then say everybody is going on the new contracts. Those already on the new contracts vote against strike action (would probably not even get to a vote) because they've nothing to gain from striking and those on the old contracts are then forced onto the new ones.
Can you be forced onto a new contract (not sure...)?
Could always ask for a guarantee that that won’t happen, like the RMT want no DOO guarantees.
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
32,269
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
But, yes it’s Liverpool that’s the problem, I’m not singling out a single depot by the way, but the idea it’s one depot causing all the problems is laughable.

If an agreement with a TOC is reached, voted on by the union membership and then approved by a majority of union members, noting the oft-cited word "solidarity", can then one particular train depot choose not to adhere to such an agreement?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top