Arriva Rail North DOO

[Bletchleyite]

Didn't SWT many moons ago promise to retain guards in perpetuity? I know it was different owners and probably people who have long since moved on, but that's certainly going to cause problems now.

I don't think SWR are planning to destaff, but I suspect they are considering driver door operation on the suburbans so the "guards" (even if they remain safety trained) can get out of the cab and check tickets. Which I imagine most of the present non-commercial guards don't like.

FWIW, I see no role for *non-commercial* guards on the railway at all. They should all become commercial guards, and door controls be modified (ideally driver release) to allow them to do that role and assist passengers in the passenger cabin, which is their real value.

 

[Journeyman]

I don't think SWR are planning to destaff, but I suspect they are considering driver door operation on the suburbans so the "guards" (even if they remain safety trained) can get out of the cab and check tickets. Which I imagine most of the present non-commercial guards don't like.

FWIW, I see no role for *non-commercial* guards on the railway at all. They should all become commercial guards, and door controls be modified (ideally driver release) to allow them to do that role and assist passengers in the passenger cabin, which is their real value.

You're absolutely right - I used SWT/SWR suburban services for years, and the guards never made any effort to interact with the punters *at all*. They hid in the rear/middle cabs with their feet up reading newspapers most of the time, and that really can't be defended any more.

 

[Moonshot]

I don't think SWR are planning to destaff, but I suspect they are considering driver door operation on the suburbans so the "guards" (even if they remain safety trained) can get out of the cab and check tickets. Which I imagine most of the present non-commercial guards don't like.

FWIW, I see no role for *non-commercial* guards on the railway at all. They should all become commercial guards, and door controls be modified (ideally driver release) to allow them to do that role and assist passengers in the passenger cabin, which is their real value.

Absolutely bang on....and Im a guard myself. No way should we be doing door duties when better methods exist.

 

[Domh245]

I don't think SWR are planning to destaff, but I suspect they are considering driver door operation on the suburbans so the "guards" (even if they remain safety trained) can get out of the cab and check tickets. Which I imagine most of the present non-commercial guards don't like.

I think that is the case, but it was that throwaway line "Run the train without the second member of staff if the train is delayed" that caused the whole dispute. That line can only mean DOO operation (regardless of other staffing arrangements) which is why the RMT started the dispute, for job security. The Anglia solution (ie driver only dispatch for the most part with select areas of conventional dispatch, and safety critical guard onboard otherwise it doesn't run) will be what the RMT will be angling for.

 

[Carlisle]

The Anglia solution (ie driver only dispatch for the most part with select areas of conventional dispatch, and safety critical guard onboard otherwise it doesn't run) will be what the RMT will be angling for.

Agreed, but that solution t is only workable because GA have a substantial existing DOO area which they can operate the new trains on in that mode if necessary, whereas SWR don’t currently utilise any DOO cleared lines even thought they only currently have Leatherhead to Dorking,

 

[Domh245]

Agreed, but that solution t is only workable because GA have a substantial existing DOO area which they can utilise the new trains within , whereas SWR don’t currently have any DOO cleared lines other than Leatherhead to Dorking

True, might make the DO dispatch more difficult to introduce, but it does still show that the RMT are open to the concept of additional DO duties (after all I don't think that every station outside of the current DOO area will be guard dispatch) on the proviso of retaining safety critical status for the second member of staff. Of course that is also on the basis of the TOC being able to freely negotiate with them rather than having Government involvement forcing their approach and aims.

 

[Carlisle]

T Of course that is also on the basis of the TOC being able to freely negotiate with them rather than having Government involvement forcing their approach and aims.

If Government take a back seat, the RMT simply come forward with a whole host of pre existing red lines the TOC must sign up to fairly sharpish or face further strikes ,I can’t see how that really amounts to free and open negotiation.in any meaningful way, hence why govt became involved in this area in the first place.

 

[Moonshot]

If Government take a back seat, the RMT simply come forward with a whole host of pre existing red lines the TOC must sign up to fairly sharpish or face further strikes ,I can’t see how that really amounts to free and open negotiation.in any meaningful way, hence why govt became involved in this area in the first place.

Correct, and some of the ambitions of TOCS which favour the passenger are the ability to run trains should a guard be not avavilable , more revenue collection on board between smaller stations and less dwell time at platforms.

 

[Domh245]

If Government take a back seat, the RMT simply come forward with a whole host of pre existing red lines the TOC must sign up to fairly sharpish or face further strikes ,I can’t see how that really amounts to free and open negotiation.in any meaningful way, hence why govt became involved in this area in the first place.

Do remember that the RMT and GTR reportedly came to an agreement, but it was kiboshed by the DfT. I don't think that the RMT are as unreasonable as you are making out, and they would probably be willing to move on some of their demands, but so long as the DfT have the final say on it, they might as well to stick to their current line as something of a starting point, because the government aren't going to agree to any of it. You don't go into negotiations with your intended deal, you go beyond it and then negotiate down to your aim.

 

[northwichcat]

Not sure why but Northern have cancelled the Wakefield-Huddersfield shuttle on Saturday and are now planning to run additional electric services to and from Bradford. Is there some big event on which has resulted in them reallocating the staff?

 

[Carlisle]

I don't think that the RMT are as unreasonable as you are making out, an.

Ok, let’s say hypothetically the number of Southern’s conventionally guarded trains were still at pre dispute levels, with DOO/OBS still planned at a future date, do you think in that scenario they’d still be calling regular stoppages down there or would they have long since suspected industrial action as a goodwill gesture to passengers ?

 

[Bromley boy]

Ok, let’s say hypothetically the number of Southern’s conventionally guarded trains were still at pre dispute levels, with DOO/OBS still planned at a future date, do you think in that scenario they’d still be calling regular stoppages down there or would they have long since suspected industrial action as a goodwill gesture to passengers ?

As a TU, RMT’s primary duty is to their members, it’s not for them to make goodwill gestures to passengers (that’s for the TOC).

If the TOC had been freer to compromise perhaps a mutually acceptable deal could have been thrashed out a lot more quickly: something along the lines of guards remaining safety critical and required for train to run, but focussing on customer service, driver open/guard close etc., all guards commercial (depending on TOC).

Or some variation on that theme (as seems to be working pretty well in some other disputes).

 

[Domh245]

Ok, let’s say hypothetically the number of Southern’s conventionally guarded trains were still at pre dispute levels, with DOO/OBS still planned at a future date, do you think in that scenario they’d still be calling regular stoppages down there or would they have long since suspected industrial action as a goodwill gesture to passengers ?

I think that if the RMT had come to an agreement with southern that had been put to members and accepted, which had DOO/OBS but on terms that the RMT were happy with, the strikes would have been called off. If they hadn't reached a deal, they'd still be in dispute and the strikes would be ongoing.

 

[Carlisle]

I think that if the RMT had come to an agreement with southern that had been put to members and accepted, which had DOO/OBS but on terms that the RMT were happy with, the strikes would have been called off..

As far as I’m aware, currently they still refuse to accept even a mile of new DOO route, anywhere, under any circumstances, so without a change of heart, your solution would be so far anyway, completely unachievable

 

[Carlisle]

As a TU, RMT’s primary duty is to their members, it’s not for them to make goodwill gestures to passengers (that’s for the TOC).

If the TOC had been freer to compromise perhaps a mutually acceptable deal could have been thrashed out a lot more quickly: something along the lines of guards remaining safety critical and required for train to run, but focussing on customer service, driver open/guard close etc., all guards commercial (depending on TOC).

Or some variation on that theme (as seems to be working pretty well in some other disputes).

I think post #496 in the controversial railway opinion thread sums it up almost perfectly

 

[WatcherZero]

Rotheram/Burnham statement - We're in favour of guards of the train but passengers have suffered enough so call off your strikes and we'll work with you to help resolve the issue.

RMT - Thank you for the support of keeping guards on the train. Northern get round the table and offer us a guard on every service, until that happens we'll keep striking.

The mayors have gone further and expressly set out their position, guards are required on intercity and services with unmanned disability inacessible stations but not required on suburban services like merseyrail or suburban services in manchester in which the majority of stations are manned.

 

[northwichcat]

Just seen the personal Twitter feed of one of the RMT regional organisers. He has some very far right views with a far left view on employment rights. (Twitter's unsafe content filter even blocks some of what he's retweeted.) He'd probably have to become less right wing if he wanted to become a UKIP election candidate. I think it's quite ironic that some of those who criticise the RMT on here get labelled as right wing when they've got a far right regional organiser.

 

[Bromley boy]

I think it's quite ironic that some of those who criticise the RMT on here get labelled as right wing when they've got a far right regional organiser.

But equally there appears to be a lazy assumption on these forums that anyone who is a union member, defends a union or, God forbid, can see a union’s point of view, is automatically a hard left firebrand.

 

[northwichcat]

But equally there appears to be a lazy assumption on these forums that anyone who is a union member, defends a union or, God forbid, can see a union’s point of view, is automatically a hard left firebrand.

I feel overall the non-rail staff who post on here are politically balanced, some lean to the left, others to the right and some don't lean in either direction.

I can see the RMT's viewpoint on Northern - they don't like the idea of a guard replacement on board role which could make it easier for the next franchise to remove second members of staff altogether, even though all existing guards have been told their roles are safe until at least 2025. They also don't like the idea of services running if a member of staff is unavailable as that could mean everything would operate as normal if the RMT called a strike, it could even mean a TOC financially benefits from the RMT calling a strike. However, it's possible to see their viewpoint and think the action they are taking is wrong and inappropriate.

 

[Bromley boy]

I feel overall the non-rail staff who post on here are politically balanced, some lean to the left, others to the right and some don't lean in either direction.

So you’re implying that the railstaff on here aren’t politically balanced. That’s a divisive and rather silly comment, if I might say so.

I can ensure you there are railstaff, both on here and in “real life”, whose views encompass the entire political spectrum.

I’m curious. How many railstaff do you actually know in your “real life” to discuss politics with?

 

[northwichcat]

So you’re implying that the railstaff on here aren’t politically balanced. That’s a divisive and rather silly comment, if I might say so.

Excuse me? You might want to review what you said about people who aren't union members who post on here before you post statements like that. You accused of us of stereotyping all union members as hard left fire bands and being unable to understand the union's view point. Now you're calling me silly and divisive for saying overall the non-union members on here give a balanced opinion. Let's face it you have problems with people who have a different opinion to your own - there's evidence of it in this thread and there's evidence of it in the EU referendum thread. I think you'd be much happier living in a country like North Korea.

 

[driver_m]

So you’re implying that the railstaff on here aren’t politically balanced. That’s a divisive and rather silly comment, if I might say so.

I can ensure you there are railstaff, both on here and in “real life”, whose views encompass the entire political spectrum.

I’m curious. How many railstaff do you actually know in your “real life” to discuss politics with?

Even without going into the staff thing, to say that the non-railway staff on here are balanced, is quite frankly, ludicrous. A few are balanced, undoubtedly, but I'd say there's a distinct right wing bias to the more controversial threads on here amongst non rail staff.

If you were to do a snapshot of train drivers now, you would be surprised at the number who are right wing, and unashamedly Tory. (Unfortunately in my view) Not at my depot, where if there are, they're well hidden, but it's not hard to find. However, I do find hard left non staff posters on here, few and far between. Maybe B&I is the most left wing that I can think of.

 

[northwichcat]

Even without going into the staff thing, to say that the non-railway staff on here are balanced, is quite frankly, ludicrous. A few are balanced, undoubtedly, but I'd say there's a distinct right wing bias to the more controversial threads on here amongst non rail staff.

Would you care to give some examples of that? Note that being in the middle would mean you've in favour of there being some state owned services and some privately owned services so someone being in favour of the railways being in private ownership doesn't automatically make them right wing. Neither does wanting essential public services to be protected during industrial action, in fact you could say that ensuring the general public have access to all essential services even during industrial action is a left wing view.

 

[Robertj21a]

Even without going into the staff thing, to say that the non-railway staff on here are balanced, is quite frankly, ludicrous. A few are balanced, undoubtedly, but I'd say there's a distinct right wing bias to the more controversial threads on here amongst non rail staff.

If you were to do a snapshot of train drivers now, you would be surprised at the number who are right wing, and unashamedly Tory. (Unfortunately in my view) Not at my depot, where if there are, they're well hidden, but it's not hard to find. However, I do find hard left non staff posters on here, few and far between. Maybe B&I is the most left wing that I can think of.

I'd probably agree that non-rail staff on this forum come across as more likely to be leaning slightly to the right (but not very much). For me, the problem is that there's very little representation on here from rail *management* so other non-rail contributors, but who have managerial experience, tend to comment when there are some of the more extreme comments (invariably unions and/or RMT in particular). It could do with being better balanced with rail management input but I understand why they don't.

 

[ComUtoR]

I'd probably agree that non-rail staff on this forum come across as more likely to be leaning slightly to the right (but not very much). For me, the problem is that there's very little representation on here from rail *management* so other non-rail contributors, but who have managerial experience, tend to comment when there are some of the more extreme comments (invariably unions and/or RMT in particular). It could do with being better balanced with rail management input but I understand why they don't.

How do you know there is no rail management.......

 

[Bromley boy]

Excuse me? You might want to review what you said about people who aren't union members who post on here before you post statements like that. You accused of us of stereotyping all union members as hard left fire bands and being unable to understand the union's view point. Now you're calling me silly and divisive for saying overall the non-union members on here give a balanced opinion. .

Excuse me? You are putting words in my mouth. Your first comment was:

I think it's quite ironic that some of those who criticise the RMT on here get labelled as right wing when they've got a far right regional organiser.

I responded:

But equally there appears to be a lazy assumption on these forums that anyone who is a union member, defends a union or, God forbid, can see a union’s point of view, is automatically a hard left firebrand.

At that point neither of us was distinguishing between between union members/non members, rail staff or non railstaff. We were talking about users of the forum as a whole.

You then made the loaded statement:

I feel overall the non-rail staff who post on here are politically balanced, some lean to the left, others to the right and some don't lean in either direction.

Clearly creating a divide between rail-staff and non railstaff (both groups may be union members, or not, and both may have differing political views irrespective of membership of a union). And also implying that railstaff on here are not politically balanced.

That is what I find silly and divisive.

As for the rest of your comment, it is just another childish, personal attack on me which I will disregard. Personal attacks are easier than actually engaging with the arguments at hand I suppose.

I’ll ask you again, how many rail staff do you actually know in real life?!

Even without going into the staff thing, to say that the non-railway staff on here are balanced, is quite frankly, ludicrous.

Indeed.

I have formed the distinct impression that certain users on here have a skewed view of the world, formed in front of a computer, and would do well to get out a bit more and have some conversations with people living in the real world!

 

[Bromley boy]

I'd probably agree that non-rail staff on this forum come across as more likely to be leaning slightly to the right (but not very much). For me, the problem is that there's very little representation on here from rail *management* so other non-rail contributors, but who have managerial experience, tend to comment when there are some of the more extreme comments (invariably unions and/or RMT in particular). It could do with being better balanced with rail management input but I understand why they don't.

There are rail managers who post on here.

There are also front line rail staff who have joined from other industries where they have been involved in line management, project management, recruitment and other activities and are therefore in a position to see how railway management compares to management elsewhere.

 

[northwichcat]

I think it's quite ironic that some of those who criticise the RMT on here get labelled as right wing when they've got a far right regional organiser.

But equally there appears to be a lazy assumption on these forums that anyone who is a union member, defends a union or, God forbid, can see a union’s point of view, is automatically a hard left firebrand.

@Bromley boy - Can you honestly not see the difference? I'm talking about some people getting labelled right wing for criticising the RMT, which I'm saying is ironic when their regional organiser has right wing views. Your response gives the impression that you can't even post the RMT's viewpoint on here with being called a 'hard left firebrand.' That's certainly not the case which is why I defended the non-rail staff who post on here but apparently you think that's 'silly and 'divisive.'

I’ll ask you again, how many rail staff do you actually know in real life?!

Like most non-rail staff it's very few so how rail staff defend a dispute on public forums and social media gives the general public (who suffer as a result of industrial action) an insight in to what's going on. The press releases from Northern and the RMT give no real information at all.

I have formed the distinct impression that certain users on here have a skewed view of the world, formed in front of a computer, and would do well to get out a bit more and have some conversations with people living in the real world!

Really? I think train drivers are more likely to be cut off from the real world than people who are sat in front of a computer. Don't forget that increasingly people who end up isolated increasingly take laptops to public spaces with wifi where they meet all sorts of different people (not just different people working for the same company.)

 

[driver_m]

@Bromley boy - Can you honestly not see the difference? I'm talking about some people getting labelled right wing for criticising the RMT, which I'm saying is ironic when their regional organiser has right wing views. Your response gives the impression that you can't even post the RMT's viewpoint on here with being called a 'hard left firebrand.' That's certainly not the case which is why I defended the non-rail staff who post on here but apparently you think that's 'silly and 'divisive.'



Like most non-rail staff it's very few so how rail staff defend a dispute on public forums and social media gives the general public (who suffer as a result of industrial action) an insight in to what's going on. The press releases from Northern and the RMT give no real information at all.



Really? I think train drivers are more likely to be cut off from the real world than people who are sat in front of a computer. Don't forget that increasingly people who end up isolated increasingly take laptops to public spaces with wifi where they meet all sorts of different people (not just different people working for the same company.)

I've heard everything now. Cut off from the real world...... How are we supposed to answer that? A 4 pinter of milk is just over a quid in most of the supermarkets? I pay my butler the living wage? Demand my m&m's to be fetched into the cab minus any blue ones?

As for the other stuff. Managers do go on here. They're obviously not going to say anything, but we know they monitor these sites. Goes without saying that it's not a particularly sensible thing to bite the hand that feeds but I've no need to anyway.

 

[northwichcat]

I've heard everything now. Cut off from the real world...... How are we supposed to answer that? A 4 pinter of milk is just over a quid in most of the supermarkets? I pay my butler the living wage? Demand my m&m's to be fetched into the cab minus any blue ones?

@Bromley boy was trying to claim those who sit in front of a computer are isolated from the real world, I was merely pointing out they are often less cut off than someone who works in a train cab by themselves and talks to other rail staff during their breaks.