Mark Harper makes excuses over Northern's 24 Dec and 31 Dec failures.

northwichcat · 17 Mar 2024

This has been shared with me - a letter from Mark Harper to Esther McVey about issues relating to Northern services on 24 Dec and 31 Dec last year. While he's right about needing to change contracts with unions to include Sundays, to prevent the same problem in the future. He's wrong about the "DO NOT TRAVEL" notices.

Northern issued "DO NOT TRAVEL" notices for routes they decided to provide no services on and also failed to provide any replacement buses. They issued "CHECK BEFORE TRAVEL" notices for routes which saw a significantly reduced service and a "DO NOT TRAVEL" notice for the late afternoon and evening services across the network. In the case of the Mid Cheshire line no trains ran on 24 December and no rail replacement buses operated. Passengers were only made aware of this plan around 48-72 hours in advance. For the 31 December Northern issued the same notice but then downgraded it to "CHECK BEFORE TRAVEL" after they decided to use the available staff to provide 2 hourly services on both the Crewe and Chester routes, instead of the originally planned hourly on Crewe and no service on Chester.

Based on what was posted on this forum it doesn't sound like significantly more staff volunteered to work 31 December, over 24 December. The differences were the Bolton line was already scheduled to get bus replacements due to engineering works and then Northern planned the resources they had available more effectively.

Harper fails to mention that the failure of Northern to provide replacement road transport on those dates for passengers already holding tickets was not just a breach of contract but illegal. If he had someone other than the OLR or DfT to blame for that he probably would be taking action, like issuing the franchise holder with a fine.

RailUK Forums

pokemonsuper9 · 17 Mar 2024

northwichcat said:

Thank you for your email of 22 January, enclosing correspondence from your constituent (redacted) about Northern Trains.

The challenge Northern faced on 24 and 31 December this year was that both days were Sundays. Sunday is not in the working week for Northern's conductors, or for drivers in the North West, so the operator essentially relies on volunteers to run services. Despite the company offering significant inducements to staff, large numbers who might usually work were not willing on these two days. This impacted on Northern's ability to run services.

In this case the company issued Do Not Travel notices on safety grounds, given that services were likely to be so limited that crowding could exceed safe levels. It was also to avoid passengers travelling to stations for non- existent services. Nonetheless, I recognise this would have been frustrating for passengers, including your constituent.

This issue only further illustrates the need for reform of working practices across the rail industry, so operators can deliver the reliable, modern service passengers rightly expect and deserve. This is what the industry is seeking to achieve through their negotiations with RMT and ASLEF. There is a fair and reasonable pay offer on the table, and I urge ASELF to put it to its member to allow them to have a say in their future. ASLEF is now the only trade union in a national dispute.

A very nothing statement, what else would we expect...

scrapy · 17 Mar 2024

Should also be added that the 'significant' inducements of a taxable £100 was only offered 3 or 4 days prior when staff had already mostly made plans. Prior to that, management stated they would not be adding any inducements and didn't need volunteers to work as they would have enough volunteer managers to run the services if guards didn't volunteer. Obviously these managers had other plans.

Krokodil · 17 Mar 2024

scrapy said:
Should also be added that the 'significant' inducements of a taxable £100 was only offered 3 or 4 days prior when staff had already mostly made plans. Prior to that, management stated they would not be adding any inducements and didn't need volunteers to work as they would have enough volunteer managers to run the services if guards didn't volunteer. Obviously these managers had other plans.

Contrast with a neighbouring operator who offered an amount that basically boosted the usual Sunday pay to triple time (Northern's Sunday rate isn't exactly generous to begin with) and gave plenty of notice. Funnily enough that neighbouring operator managed to run a normal Sunday service.

Moonshot · 17 Mar 2024

I really don't get this post......it's well known that Northern can not provide a reliable service on a Sunday. As an example, some 65% of conductor jobs at my depot today are uncovered. I don't blame conductors one bit for not volunteering to work what is a rest day......why should they when the incentive is poor

bspahh · 17 Mar 2024

Who are ASELF and why do they only have one member?

43066 · 17 Mar 2024

northwichcat said:
This has been shared with me - a letter from Mark Harper to Esther McVey about issues relating to Northern services on 24 Dec and 31 Dec last year. While he's right about needing to change contracts with unions to include Sundays, to prevent the same problem in the future. He's wrong about the "DO NOT TRAVEL" notices.

Northern issued "DO NOT TRAVEL" notices for routes they decided to provide no services on and also failed to provide any replacement buses. They issued "CHECK BEFORE TRAVEL" notices for routes which saw a significantly reduced service and a "DO NOT TRAVEL" notice for the late afternoon and evening services across the network. In the case of the Mid Cheshire line no trains ran on 24 December and no rail replacement buses operated. Passengers were only made aware of this plan around 48-72 hours in advance. For the 31 December Northern issued the same notice but then downgraded it to "CHECK BEFORE TRAVEL" after they decided to use the available staff to provide 2 hourly services on both the Crewe and Chester routes, instead of the originally planned hourly on Crewe and no service on Chester.

Based on what was posted on this forum it doesn't sound like significantly more staff volunteered to work 31 December, over 24 December. The differences were the Bolton line was already scheduled to get bus replacements due to engineering works on and then Northern planned the resources they had available more effectively.

View attachment 154361

The letter is a mixture of misleading statements and barefaced lies. Significant inducements weren’t offered to staff at Northern, and the industry isn’t in negotiations with ASLEF. Any such negotiations are being prevented by the DfT! There is also no offer “on the table” for ASLEF, the last offers were rejected long ago, and were not considered remotely “fair and reasonable” by the union concerned.

If Mark Harper wants contracts changed - and said contracts are with employees, not unions - that could be achieved by bringing Sundays into the working week, as ASLEF are in favour of, and as has happened elsewhere.

northwichcat said:
Harper fails to mention that the failure of Northern to provide replacement road transport on those dates for passengers already holding tickets was not just a breach of contract but illegal. If he had someone other than the OLR or DfT to blame for that he probably would be taking action, like issuing the franchise holder with a fine.

How exactly would Mark Harper “issue the franchise holder with a fine?”. Focussing on the replacement bus issue misses the point that the DfT could have allowed Northern to offer staff incentives, and the issue would never have arisen, as @Krokodil notes.

northwichcat · 17 Mar 2024

Moonshot said:
I really don't get this post......it's well known that Northern can not provide a reliable service on a Sunday. As an example, some 65% of conductor jobs at my depot today are uncovered. I don't blame conductors one bit for not volunteering to work what is a rest day......why should they when the incentive is poor

It's the fact that Mark Harper just sees passengers being unable to get from A to B as being solely down to contracts agreed between the operator and union, nothing down to staffing levels, effective planning of limited resources or the operator failing to arrange replacement transport when they are unable to run trains.

If new contracts are agreed that include Sunday working surely they'll need more staff, otherwise other days will rely more on overtime instead. Have DfT/OLR/Northern started work to increase crew numbers?

bspahh said:
Who are ASELF and why do they only have one member?

The Associated Society of ELFs? Maybe there's a maximum height requirement that most Northern crews don't meet?

Krokodil said:
Contrast with a neighbouring operator who offered an amount that basically boosted the usual Sunday pay to triple time (Northern's Sunday rate isn't exactly generous to begin with) and gave plenty of notice. Funnily enough that neighbouring operator managed to run a normal Sunday service.

Even West Midlands Trains managed to get some form of solution by arranging bus replacements for short services, to ensure crews were available to work longer services. I think they also claimed there would be spare buses on standby in Birmingham.

Krokodil · 17 Mar 2024

43066 said:
The letter is a mixture of misleading statements and barefaced lies.

It was written by a government minister, what did you expect?

northwichcat · 17 Mar 2024

43066 said:
How exactly would Mark Harper “issue the franchise holder with a fine?”. Focussing on the replacement bus issue misses the point that the DfT could have allowed Northern to offer staff incentives, and the issue would never have arisen, as @Krokodil notes.

Even if Northern had 100% of shifts covered they shouldn't be allowed to cover themselves for potential cancellations by saying "DO NOT TRAVEL" unless there's severe weather conditions or industrial action.

A normal franchise holder (not OLR) has a contract. If they fail to keep the contract they can be fined for breach of contract.

Moonshot · 17 Mar 2024

northwichcat said:
It's the fact that Mark Harper just sees passengers being unable to get from A to B as being solely down to contracts agreed between the operator and union, nothing down to staffing levels, effective planning of limited resources or the operator failing to arrange replacement transport when they are unable to run trains.

If new contracts are agreed that include Sunday working surely they'll need more staff, otherwise other days will rely more on overtime instead. Have DfT/OLR/Northern started work to increase crew numbers?

The Associated Society of ELFs? Maybe there's a maximum height requirement that most Northern crews don't meet?

Even West Midlands Trains managed to get some form of solution by arranging bus replacements for short services, to ensure crews were available to work longer services. I think they also claimed there would be spare buses on standby in Birmingham.

As I'm privy to internal Northern documents, it' doesn't mean that an increase in staff numbers is what is required to cover Sundays inside......an alternative way of doing that is to simply increase the contract hours of the existing staff. That is the cheaper option, and in fact is a proposal on the agenda document produced internally. Highly unlikely to happen, unless a fire and rehire scheme is brought in. So take it from me......there will be no improvements in the Sunday service on the Western side of Northern operations until an agreement is in place which actually guarantees staff availability on a Sunday. That agreement is years away .....

CHAPS2034 · 17 Mar 2024

Krokodil said:
It was written by a government minister, what did you expect?

Unlikely.

Will have been drafted and checked to be following the approved line by DfT staff, and then signed off by Harper, maybe without even reading it .

43066 · 17 Mar 2024

northwichcat said:
It's the fact that Mark Harper just sees passengers being unable to get from A to B as being solely down to contracts agreed between the operator and union

What contracts do you think are agreed between operator and union? The relevant contracts are between employer and employee (they’re negotiated by the union, which is perhaps what you mean, but it’s an important distinction!). Mark Harper is the transport secretary so is fully aware of the state of play - he evidently has no interest in improving things for railway passengers.

northwichcat said:
Even if Northern had 100% of shifts covered they shouldn't be allowed to cover themselves for potential cancellations by saying "DO NOT TRAVEL" unless there's severe weather conditions or industrial action.

A normal franchise holder (not OLR) has a contract. If they fail to keep the contract they can be fined for breach of contract.

You do realise all expenditure has to be signed off by the DfT, so if Northern didn’t incentive their staff properly, that’s where the blame lies. It suits the government for people to blame Northern, of course.

It isn’t illegal to breach a contract and they wouldn’t be fined for failing to do so. Sued for damages for breach of contract, perhaps, but it’s pretty clear they the TOCs are just doing what the DfT want them to do by virtue of the national rail contracts, so it’s unlikely the government will be suing them any time soon!

northwichcat said:
Even West Midlands Trains managed to get some form of solution by arranging bus replacements for short services, to ensure crews were available to work longer services. I think they also claimed there would be spare buses on standby in Birmingham.

Nobody wants replacement buses because everyone knows they’re rubbish, hence hardly anybody uses them. If we want a reliable operation on Sundays train operators need to be able to incentivise their staff to cover Sundays, or Sundays need to be brought into the working week. Currently the DfT are preventing both…

CHAPS2034 said:
Unlikely.

Will have been drafted and checked to be following the approved line by DfT staff, and then signed off by Harper, maybe without even reading it .

Evidently not very thoroughly checked given the typos.

Horizon22 · 17 Mar 2024

On the topic of replacement road transport, can we know what Northern planning/control tried to obtain - and crucially what finances / price struture they were authorised to go to - and whether there were actually any takers at short notice in the Christmas period?

Broadly the people holding Northern to account as an OLR are the same people running the service, so nobody will be "suing" anyone.

Ashfordian6 · 17 Mar 2024

The attached letter perfectly demonstrates how incompetent Mark Harper and his department are.

Anyone who thinks £100 pre-tax (£50 after tax) to work the Sunday before Xmas or the Sunday before NYD is a "significant inducement" lives in the same cloud cookoo land as Mark Harper.

The more that comes out from the Government, the more they demonstrate how inept they are!

northwichcat · 18 Mar 2024

43066 said:
It isn’t illegal to breach a contract and they wouldn’t be fined for failing to do so. Nobody wants replacement buses because everyone knows they’re rubbish, hence hardly anybody uses them.

Your employment contract will state what your employer has to pay you. Not paying you that would be a breach of contract. Not paying you at all would be illegal, as employers have to comply with minimum wage legislation. If you weren't paid HMRC could take action against your employer, even if your union did nothing.

It's the same with passenger provision on the railways. Not providing an advertised service is a breach of contract and can lead to a refund or cancellation for the passenger. Not providing any services at all on a given day or cancelling the last service of the day means an operator legally has to provide either overnight accommodation or replacement road transport.

This is where the rail replacement bus point is relevant. I accept people will avoid non-essential travel if rail replacement buses are advertised. However, for a retail worker who agreed their Christmas and New Year shifts weeks in advance, it's unacceptable for a transport provider to decide 48 hours in advance we're suspending the service as we don't have the staff to provide it and aren't doing anything about alternative provision.

Ashfordian6 said:
Anyone who thinks £100 pre-tax (£50 after tax) to work the Sunday before Xmas or the Sunday before NYD is a "significant inducement" lives in the same cloud cookoo land as Mark Harper.

I'm presuming it would have been around £70 post-tax for guards, as they won't be incurring income tax at the 40p rate.

Although, saying that while train crews don't need degrees, there may be some drivers who do have degrees and haven't paid off their student loan, so there could be a student loan deduction in addition to income tax and NI.

Krokodil said:
It was written by a government minister, what did you expect?

It's also directed at a Tory MP. Had Mike Amesbury received it, it probably would have got a follow up effectively saying that's a load of rubbish that doesn't address the issues raised.

weastebusdepot · 18 Mar 2024

Horizon22 said:
On the topic of replacement road transport, can we know what Northern planning/control tried to obtain - and crucially what finances / price struture they were authorised to go to - and whether there were actually any takers at short notice in the Christmas period?

Broadly the people holding Northern to account as an OLR are the same people running the service, so nobody will be "suing" anyone.

Northern did provide replacement minibuses for some of the cancelled final services of the day on New Year's Eve. However they didn't provide any coordinators, so buses came and went away empty while the intending passengers were standing there because no one told them where the buses were going.

Horizon22 · 18 Mar 2024

weastebusdepot said:
Northern did provide replacement minibuses for some of the cancelled final services of the day on New Year's Eve. However they didn't provide any coordinators, so buses came and went away empty while the intending passengers were standing there because no one told them where the buses were going.

Providing a few buses for the cancelled last trains of the day is of course a completely different kettle of fish compared to a wholesale rail replacement service sustained across multiple routes for the whole day.

You'd have thought station staff (where available) would be able to guide people to the designated rail replacement point with a (likely approximate) departure time.

DarloRich · 18 Mar 2024

a total nothing burger - why the level of comment and hot air about it here?

Ashfordian6 · 18 Mar 2024

DarloRich said:
a total nothing burger - why the level of comment and hot air about it here?

Because we have a Government minister openly lying and this should rightly be highlighted and called out. There is no way £50 post tax is a significant inducement

Or are you OK with this? And continue to accept the disinformation spread by this Minister and this Government?

This is further evidence to undermine those who are supportive of the Government with how they happy to continue their scorched earth policy around the railway dispute while ignoring passengers and the wider economy. It's simply more lies from them!

DarloRich · 18 Mar 2024

Ashfordian6 said:
Because we have a Government minister openly lying and this should rightly be highlighted and called out. There is no way £50 post tax is a significant inducement

Or are you OK with this? And continue to accept the disinformation spread by this Minister and this Government?

They are Tories - what do you expect? ( actually this lot aren't Tories but that is a another story) They want anger, division and upset to deflect from their own uselessness. Just ignore it an move on. Vote them out when the chance comes.

BTW What do you expect him to do? Confess everything? Admit it is their fault?

Ashfordian6 said:
This is further evidence to undermine those who are supportive of the Government with how they happy to continue their scorched earth policy around the railway dispute while ignoring passengers and the wider economy.

i don't know what this means!

class 9 · 18 Mar 2024

He's like a stuck record! He's so used to lying to the public, he does the same to one of his own MPs.

Class 170101 · 18 Mar 2024

Good luck to getting Rail Replacement buses at 48hrs notice in 24 and 31 December I would suggest.

GusB · 18 Mar 2024

Class 170101 said:
Good luck to getting Rail Replacement buses at 48hrs notice in 24 and 31 December I would suggest.

Ah, but the OP seems to think that there should be a load of people standing by to provide such services because it's their duty to do so. These oiks don't have degrees (they don't work hard enough), so they've no right to expect any sort of work-life balance.

This issue was widely discussed at the time and there's absolutely no need to drag it up again.

43066 · 18 Mar 2024

northwichcat said:
You're mixing up two points. Your employment contract will state what your employer has to pay you. Not paying you that would be a breach of contract. Not paying you at all would be illegal, as employers have to comply with minimum wage legislation. If you weren't paid HMRC could take action against your employer, even if your union did nothing.

It's the same with passenger provision on the railways. Not providing an advertised service is a breach of contract and can lead to a refund or cancellation. Not providing any services at all on a given day or cancelling the last service of the day means an operator legally has to provide either overnight accommodation or replacement road transport.

I’m not mixing up points at all. These are completely separate issues. Train operators enter into franchise agreements (latterly national rail contracts) with the government to provide services, and they also enter into contracts with passengers who buy tickets. Neither are employment contracts, and neither are governed by minimum wage legislation.

If the operators cant/wont provide services (as happens fairly regularly) they can be sued for damages by passengers and/or stripped of their franchises if they breach their national rail contracts, but that isn’t the same as being fined, and any fine certainly wouldn’t come from Mark Harper and the DfT.

With respect upthread you referred to “contracts with unions” when you were actually referring to employment contracts between employers and employees, so I’m not sure you’re best placed to lecture others about these matters!

northwichcat said:
I'm presuming it would have been around £70 post-tax for guards, as they won't be incurring income tax at the 40p rate.

Still a rubbish incentive in the scheme of things. You don’t seem to be acknowledging the point that the TOC in question is directly controlled by the government and, had a better incentive been offered, the issue could have been avoided. That would have been a much better outcome for the travelling that replacement buses, even had they run perfectly.

northwichcat said:
This is where the rail replacement bus point is relevant. I accept people will avoid non-essential travel if rail replacement buses are advertised. However, for a retail worker who agreed their Christmas and New Year shifts weeks in advance, it's unacceptable for a transport provider to decide 48 hours in advance we're suspending the service as we don't have the staff to provide it and aren't doing anything about alternative provision.

The government evidently considers it completely acceptable.

GusB said:
Ah, but the OP seems to think that there should be a load of people standing by to provide such services because it's their duty to do so. These oiks don't have degrees (they don't work hard enough), so they've no right to expect any sort of work-life balance.

This issue was widely discussed at the time and there's absolutely no need to drag it up again.

Yes. Interesting how they felt it necessary to point out that train crew don’t need degrees

.

ComUtoR · 18 Mar 2024

I am mindful of what the letter doesn't say. It doesn't state that Sundays should be in the working week.

Krokodil · 18 Mar 2024

Class 170101 said:
Good luck to getting Rail Replacement buses at 48hrs notice in 24 and 31 December I would suggest.

Should be just as easy as persuading the staff to come in on their day off at short notice for £100 above the (rather miserly) usual Sunday rate.

ComUtoR said:
I am mindful of what the letter doesn't say. It doesn't state that Sundays should be in the working week.

Heaven forbid that they do things properly when they could just use the staff as a scapegoat instead.

northwichcat · 19 Mar 2024

Class 170101 said:
Good luck to getting Rail Replacement buses at 48hrs notice in 24 and 31 December I would suggest.

GusB said:
Ah, but the OP seems to think that there should be a load of people standing by to provide such services because it's their duty to do so. These oiks don't have degrees (they don't work hard enough), so they've no right to expect any sort of work-life balance.

This issue was widely discussed at the time and there's absolutely no need to drag it up again.

You both seem unaware that it was reported on this forum Northern had the same issues the previous time 24 and 31 Dec fell on a Sunday. It's a joke to think Northern could only request replacement buses two days before. They could have done it when the timetable was confirmed.

They obviously knew about the staffing issues prior to Network Rail giving them notice the Bolton closure on 31 December. They just didn't know the exact number of services volunteers would cover.

I just hope you two don't try to manage a transport operation, if you think having plan B is only needed when plan A actually fails.

SteveM70 · 19 Mar 2024

Does anyone on here who is a northern conductor fancy writing to Mark Harper to ask him why he’s lying about the “considerable incentives” etc etc?

whoosh · 19 Mar 2024

43066 said:
If Mark Harper wants contracts changed - and said contracts are with employees, not unions - that could be achieved by bringing Sundays into the working week, as ASLEF are in favour of, and as has happened elsewhere.

Yes, it's strange how better productivity, more modern working practices, and Sundays in the working week, have been achieved in the driving grade at Transport for Wales.
It's almost like there's been a proper negotiation!

Mark Harper makes excuses over Northern's 24 Dec and 31 Dec failures.

Established Member

RailUK Forums

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member