Arriva Rail North DOO

[Chester1]

I've never had a job with more than 6 months security. I'm utterly staggered that anyone can possibly be moaning about not having a job after 2025 !. Which planet are rail staff on ?

You asked me what I would do, and I told you. Now you don't like it - absolutely classic !!

Has it ever occurred to you that most of the UK population are used to having to change jobs, train for new roles, possibly move house etc etc ?

You've got a job with fantastic security, a supposedly strong union that you all support - and yet you spend all your time complaining as if you're the most hard done employees on the planet.

There, was that a response more to your liking ?

Job security past a certain point can be a double edged sword. I am a civil servant and have worked with people who have no enjoyment from their work and constantly moan while never trying to change their situation. When you have decent pay and security its easier just to complain and wait for retirement than take a risk at something new. Job security could be improved in the private sector. I would limit the amount of time someone can be a temp to something like 3 months and make fixed term contracts automatically become permenant after 2-3 years. I have noticed in this thread and the Southern one how many rail employees have picked up a very negative view of work outside their industry that reflects the job market 2008-2012 but not today and who won't be persauded otherwise. Job security is a balance between being too low to provide workers reasonable protection and so high that it provides a significant disincentive to employ anyone because its too expensive to fire them if they are not good enough or get lazy. I don't want to see the UK have French levels of structural unemployment which has preexisted the country's economic problems.

 

[Bletchleyite]

How many DOO metro services operate using higher risk slam door trains versus IC services still widely operated by slam door HST and Loco hauled trains and is this considered in the weighting I wonder, as it certainly isn't mentioned in the report.

How many passenger services with slam doors (other than the Class 442 "guard's" door) have ever operated DOO in the UK?

Loco hauled is an interesting one as it's not easy for the driver to attend to a problem in the train, but it's no different to the Chiltern service I was just on, in the rear unit of a non-gangwayed set with no member of staff whatsoever in that unit.

 

[LowLevel]

How many passenger services with slam doors (other than the Class 442 "guard's" door) have ever operated DOO in the UK?

Loco hauled is an interesting one as it's not easy for the driver to attend to a problem in the train, but it's no different to the Chiltern service I was just on, in the rear unit of a non-gangwayed set with no member of staff whatsoever in that unit.

Very few. I believe there have been a few instances here and there but they've been few and far between.

My point was more that there is a chart of dispatch incidents whereby the conductor incidents are skewed by a larger number of Intercity trains. These trains are still regularly operated by slam door trains which by their nature are far more likely than power door trains to cause dispatch incidents, either from passenger action (jumping out of droplights, forcing doors on to the catch causing emergency stops etc) or staff error (missing doors being open, being distracted and missing a red signal due to door issues or whatever).

None of the lower figured metro trains are going to be operated by slam door stock with it's greater inherent problems yet I think it's a significant reason why the IC trains have so many more incidents and thus skew the conductor figures.

I would be interested to see what would happen if you took slam door incidents out - I think the figures would be far closer.

 

[Bromley boy]

I've never had a job with more than 6 months security. I'm utterly staggered that anyone can possibly be moaning about not having a job after 2025 !. Which planet are rail staff on ?

You asked me what I would do, and I told you. Now you don't like it - absolutely classic !!

Has it ever occurred to you that most of the UK population are used to having to change jobs, train for new roles, possibly move house etc etc ?

You've got a job with fantastic security, a supposedly strong union that you all support - and yet you spend all your time complaining as if you're the most hard done employees on the planet.

There, was that a response more to your liking ?

But isn’t that just the classic “race to the bottom” argument? Why should poor T’s and C’s and job insecurity in other industries be used as a stick to beat railstaff with?

Surely the focus should be on improving the lot of other workers, rather than attacking those currently enjoying stable employment?!

Keep in mind also that what is being argued for by the unions is the continued existence of the guards’ role itself. That is by no means “guaranteed employment” for anyone currently in the role. It’s perfectly possible for any existing guard to lose their job through ill health, poor performance etc.

 

[B&I]

Right firstly thank you for your honesty. Whilst the RMT are peddling the lie that it's all about our safety and jobs have been guaranteed at least you are honest about their intentions. However I need to point out how you are wrong about them abolishing the guard. They have said that it will be a new role and I believe them. Simply speaking because they are a private company that relies on ticket sales. Only a small number of stations have barriers so they need someone to check tickets and protect revenue. Hence why the guard minus operating the doors will remain. Even if you were right though, which is doubtful given the above, the point is the strikes arnt working. In short all you will succeed in doing is losing money and annoying passengers. Like I said I've seen no evidence in England and on the Northern network where this is not the case but if you have evidence please tell us. I'm open to being proven wrong and besides if you did have this evidence it may be something us customers could defend to get these strikes over and done with to the powers that be.

I'm not a guard. While I think trains with guards are safer than trains without, I would reluctabtly agree that something has to be done about Northern Rail's staffing costs and this may outweigh yhe additional safety guards provide (though if this government really cared about reducing the costs of running the railways, there are a lot of other places where a lot more savings could be made).

However, I've yet to see a single argument from the anti-union faction on here which gets beyond unconditional surrender by the RMT of any long-term job security for guards. What's in it for them ? The main argument on here seems to be that guards shouldn't expect secure employment because no-one else can. Boy that's convincing.

Btw I think Northern Rail have done more in the last 2 weeks ro annoy their own passengers than the rail unions have managed in over 60 years.

 

[B&I]

I've never had a job with more than 6 months security. I'm utterly staggered that anyone can possibly be moaning about not having a job after 2025 !. Which planet are rail staff on ?

You asked me what I would do, and I told you. Now you don't like it - absolutely classic !!

Has it ever occurred to you that most of the UK population are used to having to change jobs, train for new roles, possibly move house etc etc ?

You've got a job with fantastic security, a supposedly strong union that you all support - and yet you spend all your time complaining as if you're the most hard done employees on the planet.

There, was that a response more to your liking ?

So, you don't enjoy job security, so no-one else should. What a petty, depressing, self-defeating argument.

You address me as if I'm a guard, which is I assume a result of your contempt for railway employees and habit of lumping anyone who disagrees with you into the same boat. Well I'm not. I'm self-employed, in a field where I often don't know from day to day whether I'll have any work to do, and where my livelihood is ubder further threat because the current government is taking time out from its ballsing up of the Brexit process to pander to certain large business interests. Do I express the anxiety I suffer because of my insecurity of employment by jealousy towards people with more secure jobs ? No, I hope instead for a society with less insecurity and less anxiety

 

[JamesT]

Very few. I believe there have been a few instances here and there but they've been few and far between.

My point was more that there is a chart of dispatch incidents whereby the conductor incidents are skewed by a larger number of Intercity trains. These trains are still regularly operated by slam door trains which by their nature are far more likely than power door trains to cause dispatch incidents, either from passenger action (jumping out of droplights, forcing doors on to the catch causing emergency stops etc) or staff error (missing doors being open, being distracted and missing a red signal due to door issues or whatever).

None of the lower figured metro trains are going to be operated by slam door stock with it's greater inherent problems yet I think it's a significant reason why the IC trains have so many more incidents and thus skew the conductor figures.

I would be interested to see what would happen if you took slam door incidents out - I think the figures would be far closer.

The report did split out the conductor trains into Metro, Regional, and Intercity. I'm aware of the HSTs on the Intercity operators, but is there anything without power doors in use with the other types of operator? The conductor figures were higher than DO metro in all cases, which suggests it's not the door type if at least some of those operators don't have any slam doors.

 

[woodmally]

I'm not a guard. While I think trains with guards are safer than trains without, I would reluctabtly agree that something has to be done about Northern Rail's staffing costs and this may outweigh yhe additional safety guards provide (though if this government really cared about reducing the costs of running the railways, there are a lot of other places where a lot more savings could be made).

However, I've yet to see a single argument from the anti-union faction on here which gets beyond unconditional surrender by the RMT of any long-term job security for guards. What's in it for them ? The main argument on here seems to be that guards shouldn't expect secure employment because no-one else can. Boy that's convincing.

Btw I think Northern Rail have done more in the last 2 weeks ro annoy their own passengers than the rail unions have managed in over 60 years.

Your missing my other point though where is the evidence they are getting rid of staff? They have guaranteed jobs but in a new role till the end of the franchise. No one can guarantee jobs beyond that point in any organisation. Secondly Northern are not going to want no one checking tickets as tickets are their revenue. No company in their right mind would lose revenue. Thirdly about surrendering. Yes I am recommending giving up as I cannot see how RMT can win. If anyone can prove to me specifically in England where we have a different set up to Scotland and Wales the RMT can get Northern to break their franchise agreement then I will have some support for the strikes. However I have seen no evidence the strikes are working. So why do something that loses your members money when you won't win. And you already have a job in a new role.

 

[PR1Berske]

So, you don't enjoy job security, so no-one else should. What a petty, depressing, self-defeating argument.

You address me as if I'm a guard, which is I assume a result of your contempt for railway employees and habit of lumping anyone who disagrees with you into the same boat. Well I'm not. I'm self-employed, in a field where I often don't know from day to day whether I'll have any work to do, and where my livelihood is ubder further threat because the current government is taking time out from its ballsing up of the Brexit process to pander to certain large business interests. Do I express the anxiety I suffer because of my insecurity of employment by jealousy towards people with more secure jobs ? No, I hope instead for a society with less insecurity and less anxiety

It really isn't "I suffer job insecurity so should you." It's "I don't have the guaranteed job security Northern has pledged, I'd rather like to have that from my employer too."

 

[PR1Berske]

Btw I think Northern Rail have done more in the last 2 weeks ro annoy their own passengers than the rail unions have managed in over 60 years.

That may well be true, though you understand why it's also pointed out that the RMT calling strikes *at the same time* as timetable related misery might not do the world of good for their cause?

 

[LowLevel]

The report did split out the conductor trains into Metro, Regional, and Intercity. I'm aware of the HSTs on the Intercity operators, but is there anything without power doors in use with the other types of operator? The conductor figures were higher than DO metro in all cases, which suggests it's not the door type if at least some of those operators don't have any slam doors.

They were slightly higher (and there's a school of thought that suggests incidents on DOO services are less likely to be reported given the driver may not even realise they've made a mistake) but Intercity incidents were significantly higher which bumped the conductor average right up, was my point. Take the Intercity trains out of the equation and look at comparable services and things are much more even.

Or to put it another way - I worked at an IC station dispatching. The vast majority to the point I would nearly say all dispatch incidents were related to slam door trains.

When you have an anomalous statistic as significant as the Intercity one you look for reasons for the anomaly. They've covered reasons DOO services might be lower (familiar commuters etc) but I believe the presence of slam door trains is significant enough to skew the stats itself. This is enough to make the conductor average look worse than it would be otherwise.

 

[Dave1987]

I've never had a job with more than 6 months security. I'm utterly staggered that anyone can possibly be moaning about not having a job after 2025 !. Which planet are rail staff on ?

You asked me what I would do, and I told you. Now you don't like it - absolutely classic !!

Has it ever occurred to you that most of the UK population are used to having to change jobs, train for new roles, possibly move house etc etc ?

You've got a job with fantastic security, a supposedly strong union that you all support - and yet you spend all your time complaining as if you're the most hard done employees on the planet.

There, was that a response more to your liking ?

Your way thinking is exactly why wages are so low in the economy. Without job security people are terrified to demand higher wages for fear of being sacked because ‘someone else will do the job if you don’t’ culture. Because of the way the Tories continue to treat the unemployed people are terrified to lose their jobs. Just look at yesterday with Rolls Royce cutting 4500 jobs despite being a massively profitable business and Tory MPs almost praising the job losses as a good thing. Amazing how a right wing Government can influence people’s fears isn’t it and how that can have consequences.

 

[B&I]

It really isn't "I suffer job insecurity so should you." It's "I don't have the guaranteed job security Northern has pledged, I'd rather like to have that from my employer too."

No, I get the impresson that it's more 'I'm miserable, so everyone else should be too'

 

[B&I]

That may well be true, though you understand why it's also pointed out that the RMT calling strikes *at the same time* as timetable related misery might not do the world of good for their cause?

I wouldn't disagree with that. The RMT's PR skills are worse than rudimentary

 

[Robertj21a]

I happen to feel that a maximum of, say, 6-12 months notice for job security is rather good. It keeps the employee aware that the 'real world' out there has numerous other jobs that I can apply for at any time. It gives me fresh thought and the possibility of learning about different practices.
To my mind the long job security encourages staff to become complacent and they can become a burden on employers, who need to continually adapt to fresh needs and innovations.
It's amazing that some rail staff appear virtually petrified at the very thought of leaving the cosy employment for the real world. Obviously, I can see the attraction of a routine job with hardly any risks at all but I'm sure a lot of people would find it all rather stifling.

 

[B&I]

Your missing my other point though where is the evidence they are getting rid of staff? They have guaranteed jobs but in a new role till the end of the franchise. No one can guarantee jobs beyond that point in any organisation. Secondly Northern are not going to want no one checking tickets as tickets are their revenue. No company in their right mind would lose revenue. Thirdly about surrendering. Yes I am recommending giving up as I cannot see how RMT can win. If anyone can prove to me specifically in England where we have a different set up to Scotland and Wales the RMT can get Northern to break their franchise agreement then I will have some support for the strikes. However I have seen no evidence the strikes are working. So why do something that loses your members money when you won't win. And you already have a job in a new role.

And with respect, you're missing my point. 7 years guarantee of a job (assuming the franchise lasts that long is more security than most people have (which is none), but it's still.less security than they would have if trains continue to require guards.

The argument that a second member of staff will be retained for revenue protection is, I'm afraid, naive. If TOCs were worried about revenue protection, they wouldn't continually leave ticket gates open to reduce the cost of staffing them. What's to say that Northern will not take the same approach to staffing trains ? You forget that we are not dealing witj a real commercial operation with commercial incentives to make a profit, but an outsourced public service whose income is underwritten by the government.

Your references to Scotland and Wales illustrate the incentive for the guards to hold out. This English government will not, I hope, last forever, and under another one there may be a different deal on offer to the guards

 

[B&I]

I happen to feel that a maximum of, say, 6-12 months notice for job security is rather good. It keeps the employee aware that the 'real world' out there has numerous other jobs that I can apply for at any time. It gives me fresh thought and the possibility of learning about different practices.
To my mind the long job security encourages staff to become complacent and they can become a burden on employers, who need to continually adapt to fresh needs and innovations.
It's amazing that some rail staff appear virtually petrified at the very thought of leaving the cosy employment for the real world. Obviously, I can see the attraction of a routine job with hardly any risks at all but I'm sure a lot of people would find it all rather stifling.

So you would welcome your own redundancy ?

 

[Moonshot]

So you would welcome your own redundancy ?

Having been made redundant twice in my career , the significant payout I got enabled me to pay off the mortgage ....and I started work elsewhere 2 days later. Make no mistake about this, some guards at Northern who are not too far away from retirement would gladly take a severance package.

 

[northwichcat]

If someone asked me to wear an orange jacket and a purple skirt I’d most certainly go on strike!

I'd fully expect a dispute if that was proposed as a new uniform for a future franchise, which is why I used it as an example. However, using the logic of @B&I you should have a uniform dispute now unless you have a guarantee in place that the uniforms used by future franchise will be reasonable.

 

[northwichcat]

Make no mistake about this, some guards at Northern who are not too far away from retirement would gladly take a severance package.

I recall someone saying on this forum that some of the long serving guards who are a few years off retirement are unhappy that they could end up having to resign if they don't like the revised on board role when they'd much rather be made redundant.

 

[northwichcat]

However, I've yet to see a single argument from the anti-union faction on here which gets beyond unconditional surrender by the RMT of any long-term job security for guards. What's in it for them ? The main argument on here seems to be that guards shouldn't expect secure employment because no-one else can. Boy that's convincing.

Incorrect. The main argument is that a guarantee of work on the same pay grade for a minimum of 9 years is long term job security. Even if the next Northern franchise get rid of guards altogether they are likely to prefer to find alternative employment for guards for the reasons @Moonshot has given.

Btw I think Northern Rail have done more in the last 2 weeks ro annoy their own passengers than the rail unions have managed in over 60 years.

I doubt that very much. Remember the anti-privatisation national strikes in the 90s?

 

[Moonshot]

I recall someone saying on this forum that some of the long serving guards who are a few years off retirement are unhappy that they could end up having to resign if they don't like the revised on board role when they'd much rather be made redundant.

Not sure, but as has been pointed out many times , no one is actually losing their jobs or salaries. I can safely tell you that despite all the strikes, a good number of guards are not happy about losing money for a cause they can't win. A new ballot is required, and I would predict that if that took place , the strikes would end.. Arriva have apparently told RMT that they will not negotiate on pay rise until strikes are dropped.

 

[47802]

So why is the usual approach on here to pour scorn on people who are in danger of losing their job security, rather than criticising a political and economic environment which has made most people's jobs radically less secure ?

From the point of view of technology and progress there are many jobs in many industries which have disappeared or changed over the years, yet certain aspects of the rail industry are immune to this it would seem.

 

[Robertj21a]

So you would welcome your own redundancy ?

Been there, done that. Good experience as it encourages you to look at fresh ideas, training and/or new adventures. I'd never encourage anybody to stay stuck in a rut in any job if they believe that they have sufficient ability to pursue other avenues.

 

[northwichcat]

Strike timetables for Tuesday and Thursday are now online: https://www.northernrailway.co.uk/strike

I think the limited Mid-Cheshire service is going to have a detrimental effect on visitor numbers for the 1st day of the Cheshire Show. The first shuttle bus for the show will leave Knutsford station before the first train from Altrincham arrives, while the last shuttle buses to both Knutsford and Northwich stations will arrive after the last trains have departed and unlike on previous occasions there's no replacement buses running later in to the evening.

 

[woodmally]

And with respect, you're missing my point. 7 years guarantee of a job (assuming the franchise lasts that long is more security than most people have (which is none), but it's still.less security than they would have if trains continue to require guards.

The argument that a second member of staff will be retained for revenue protection is, I'm afraid, naive. If TOCs were worried about revenue protection, they wouldn't continually leave ticket gates open to reduce the cost of staffing them. What's to say that Northern will not take the same approach to staffing trains ? You forget that we are not dealing witj a real commercial operation with commercial incentives to make a profit, but an outsourced public service whose income is underwritten by the government.

Your references to Scotland and Wales illustrate the incentive for the guards to hold out. This English government will not, I hope, last forever, and under another one there may be a different deal on offer to the guards

Right thank you once again for making a very valid point "The English government wont hold out forever". That's what I suspected all along that RMT are waiting for a Corbyn government to take charge. And your right if that does happen then the guard will be retained. However lets look a this two ways. Firstly whats the point in striking now when there is no way of changing the Tory governments mind and Northern cannot back down. That's not going to change the government is it. All that will happen if a change of government does not happen is the guards will have lost money. Secondly if there is a Corbyn government (then the RMT just need to have a meeting with Corbyn and the new transport secretary and the guard is retained. So either there is no need for strike action or it wont work. Either way no point in striking as they are not getting anywhere other than a lower wage packet. Scotland and Wales succeeded as its a different set up. It wont work here so why strike.

 

[northwichcat]

Right thank you once again for making a very valid point "The English government wont hold out forever". That's what I suspected all along that RMT are waiting for a Corbyn government to take charge. And your right if that does happen then the guard will be retained.

The Conservatives have consistently referred to Northern introducing DCO and a contract is already in place for that.

Andy McDonald (Shadow Transport Secretary) has talked about no further DOO under Labour and citied his reasons as passengers wanting the guarantee of a visible on board staff presence and having someone to assist passengers where necessary.

If there was a General Election tomorrow and Labour won I wouldn't be surprised if they allowed DCO on Northern (with drivers doing opening and closing of doors), on condition there's a guarantee of a second person on every service and Labour could argue they delivered the guarantee set out by Andy McDonald in full. The contract is already in place (which they can blame the Conservatives for) and they can argue DCO with a guarantee of a second person on board does is not something Andy McDonald promised wouldn't happen.

 

[virgintrain1]

I hate the argument that if you're going to lose then why fight. It's standing up for what's right and it is about safety (unless they garentee a second safety critical member of staff on every train). Some people not working on the railway on here seem to get anoyed about our T&C's ect. Well the railway should be a role model to other industries e.g. aviation.

You have to always fight as even if it doesn't work it shows other TOCs that to expect if they by choice try to bring in DOO.

I live in Tory majority constituency and still vote Labour even though I know it will not change the result.

 

[northwichcat]

I live in Tory majority constituency and still vote Labour even though I know it will not change the result.

There have been shock election results though, especially in by-elections where a party which had a 20,000 majority can end up losing the seat.

 

[Dave1987]

Been there, done that. Good experience as it encourages you to look at fresh ideas, training and/or new adventures. I'd never encourage anybody to stay stuck in a rut in any job if they believe that they have sufficient ability to pursue other avenues.

What about the fact that business say they struggle to recruit people with the correct skills for what they need? What about those that would struggle to find employment paying anything other than pitiful wages? You wonder why people are extremely nervous about job security!