Arriva Rail North DOO

[Dave1987]

Like I said a couple of posts back all Northern services will have a non-driving member of staff on board whether they are DCO or not. There are also plans to staff more stations and to have longer staffing hours at stations already staffed.

So we are going to get a ScotRail deal here? If so why did the DFT insist it was rejected down south?

 

[Don King]

I believe the RMT are under the belief that unless their members are operationally necessary they are prime for the axe in future which we know has happened previously. That's why they accepted the ScotRail deal. The reason they weren't prepared to accept the "DOO in certain exceptional circumstances" is they have seen loopholes exploited to the max so have no trust in making any agreements that aren't water tight. It's very understandable.

And it is quite possible that during those "exceptional circumstances", the driver in that train has a fatality, a spad, a derailment, serious collusion, or drags someone in the doors, or a late runner falls down the side.

Not to mention that usually "exceptional circumstances" are where the job has been completely screwed up, and the public need information and a presence in the train more than usual.

 

[BestWestern]

Like I said a couple of posts back all Northern services will have a non-driving member of staff on board whether they are DCO or not. There are also plans to staff more stations and to have longer staffing hours at stations already staffed.

A 'non-driving member of staff'. Brilliant. And they'll be Rules-trained safety critical, will they?

Ticket Examiner, RPI/RPO, catering staff, carriage cleaner, the bloke who orders the uniforms.....any of this lot are 'non-driving staff members'. None of them are able to act in the full manner in the event of an incident.

 

[BHXDMT]

Like I said a couple of posts back all Northern services will have a non-driving member of staff on board whether they are DCO or not. There are also plans to staff more stations and to have longer staffing hours at stations already staffed.

The circular I saw states the company have indicated they want to reduce the number of Guards. That doesn't sound conducive with retaining two members of staff now, does it?

They could, of course, put more RPAs on board but since they're not required to run and have zero safety training.....

 

[pemma]

councils including Liverpool and Sheffield have already stated opposition to DOO and ticket office cuts.

No ticket office cuts are planned. Peter Wilkinson suggested it as a money saving option in the consultation process but it was rejected and the opposite will now happen with more staffed stations and longer staffing hours. Like I also said DOO was rejected in favour of DCO.

The Northern franchise spec is probably the only one where the Conservatives, Labour and Lib Dems all contributed. It was written while the coalition government was in power and involved Rail North, with the councils that make up Rail North mainly being Labour.

Given that the drivers do not have DOO in their contracts either

What about the new drivers? The existing drivers can't drive all the existing services as well as all the new services which will be introduced.

Indeed a quote from Northern Managing Director Alex Hynes in 2014 states ""We've got no plans to do DOO [Driver Only Operation]", Northern Rail Managing Director Alex Hynes told the influential Rail Business Intelligence magazine , pointing out that the Class 319s transferring to the route from Thameslink in the south and which are set up for DOO "will be modified for conductors to open and close doors"."

How is that inaccurate? The 319s have been modified to allow the guards to release the doors and Northern Rail never introduced DOO. Are you saying that because Alex Hynes said there were no plans for DOO when he was employed by Abellio/Serco that if DCO is introduced while he is employed by Arriva that he was lying?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The circular I saw states the company have indicated they want to reduce the number of Guards. That doesn't sound conducive with retaining two members of staff now, does it?

They could, of course, put more RPAs on board but since they're not required to run and have zero safety training.....

The franchise spec does say two members of staff on board so running a service with only the driver would be a breach of the franchise agreement. I've already said the RMT need to find out what training new members of staff will get before they can make too much of a fuss about safety.

 

[YorkshireBear]

So we are going to get a ScotRail deal here? If so why did the DFT insist it was rejected down south?

From the information I have seen that has already been rejected. What is being implemented is mandatory to the franchise and basically whoever won it had to agree to it and implement it or face fines from the DfT.

I think we can make no mistake, this is government doing, not ARN.

 

[8J]

Like I said a couple of posts back all Northern services will have a non-driving member of staff on board whether they are DCO or not. There are also plans to staff more stations and to have longer staffing hours at stations already staffed.

Not true. If you read the franchise spec, it states that a train will run without a second member of staff onboard as long as it does not reduce the customer experience or ability to buy a ticket.

Routes with stations manned from the first to last train won't need a second member of staff onboard.

 

[Andrew32]

Thanks for all of your replies.

What I would have been more comfortable with in the ITT would have been the wording ' A second SAFETY CRITICAL MEMBER OF STAFF must be present on all services, stating just a second member of staff should be on board isn't enough for me.

What alarms me is that the 'scotrail agreement ' has already been been rejected by the MD because the Transport Secretary won't allow it, so who is in control here?

I get the argument that local councillors etc are against DOO/DCO (both the same in my opinion) but many MP's and commutator group/disabled groups and commuters are against the southern plans but the government are still determined force through the changes.

I don't like the silence from the company but I guess that whatever they say will be criticised, my primary concern, like all guards is the safety critical part of the job which provides comfort to both the driver and passangers knowing that were on board, I see nothing in the new agreement committing to a second SAFETY CRITICAL MEMBER OF STAFF on board every train.

 

[BestWestern]

Not true. If you read the franchise spec, it states that a train will run without a second member of staff onboard as long as it does not reduce the customer experience or ability to buy a ticket.

Routes with stations manned from the first to last train won't need a second member of staff onboard.

It will, rather obviously, 'reduce the customer experience' every single time. Unless either the train is completely empty or the staff member makes absolutely no input whatsoever, running without one will always be a loss on that score. This sort of bovine manure just serves to demonstrate what a load of nonsence is spouted to get this shambles through.

 

[yorkie]

If anyone is wishes to discuss the pros and cons of DOO please use the relevant thread: http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=129551

This thread is to discuss this specific issues relating to the proposals on Northern; discussions on whether people like DOO or not can go in the other thread. Thanks.

 

[pemma]

Not true. If you read the franchise spec, it states that a train will run without a second member of staff onboard as long as it does not reduce the customer experience or ability to buy a ticket.

Routes with stations manned from the first to last train won't need a second member of staff onboard.

Really? Where is that, as it contradicts the below from the franchise spec:

Where in accordance with paragraph 18.1, a Passenger Service is operated as Driver Controlled Operation the Franchisee shall, in preparing the train crew diagram relating to such Passenger Service plan for an additional Franchise Employee (that is, in addition to the driver) to be present on such Passenger Service for the purposes of customer service and/or revenue control.

The Franchisee shall use all reasonable endeavours to operate such Passenger Service in accordance with the train crew diagram.

 

[Andrew32]

Where in accordance with paragraph 18.1, a Passenger Service is operated as Driver Controlled Operation the Franchisee shall, in preparing the train crew diagram relating to such Passenger Service plan for an additional Franchise Employee (that is, in addition to the driver) to be present on such Passenger Service for the purposes of customer service and/or revenue control.

The Franchisee shall use all reasonable endeavours to operate such Passenger Service in accordance with the train crew diagram.

*******************************************

The above statement doesn't provide reassurance to me, that second franchise employee could be agency staff aswell a an RPA or newly created ON BOARD ASSISTANT with no safety critical status.

 

[Astradyne]

The Franchisee shall use all reasonable endeavours to operate such Passenger Service in accordance with the train crew diagram.

The get out clause

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Indeed a quote from Northern Managing Director Alex Hynes in 2014 states ""We've got no plans to do DOO [Driver Only Operation]", Northern Rail Managing Director Alex Hynes told the influential Rail Business Intelligence magazine , pointing out that the Class 319s transferring to the route from Thameslink in the south and which are set up for DOO "will be modified for conductors to open and close doors"."

The "we" in the 2014 statement referred to the Serco/Abellio franchise which finished earlier this year, and to second hand 319s.

The new Arriva Northern franchise contract terms are quite different, even if most of the people on the ground are the same.
Alex Hynes will have had no say in the contract negotiations.

 

[pemma]

The above statement doesn't provide reassurance to me, that second franchise employee could be agency staff aswell a an RPA or newly created ON BOARD ASSISTANT with no safety critical status.

No it a franchise employee means an employee of the franchise so rules out agency or third party staff.

 

[Solent&Wessex]

Really? Where is that, as it contradicts the below from the franchise spec:

Where in accordance with paragraph 18.1, a Passenger Service is operated as Driver Controlled Operation the Franchisee shall, in preparing the train crew diagram relating to such Passenger Service plan for an additional Franchise Employee (that is, in addition to the driver) to be present on such Passenger Service for the purposes of customer service and/or revenue control.

The Franchisee shall use all reasonable endeavours to operate such Passenger Service in accordance with the train crew diagram.

*******************************************

The above statement doesn't provide reassurance to me, that second franchise employee could be agency staff aswell a an RPA or newly created ON BOARD ASSISTANT with no safety critical status.

The Franchisee shall use all reasonable endeavours to operate such Passenger Service in accordance with the train crew diagram.

The get out clause

There is a subtle bit missing from the quote from the franchise agreement.

Firstly, DCO is exactly the same as DOO, as the Northern franchise agreement says:

“Driver Controlled Operation” means operation of a train by a driver alone without the need for a conductor (or any other Franchise Employee);

That sounds very much like DOO to me.

Secondly, the bit missing (in my bold) from the quote above is important:

Where in accordance with paragraph 18.1, a Passenger Service is operated as Driver Controlled Operation the Franchisee shall, in preparing the train crew diagram relating to such Passenger Service plan for an additional Franchise Employee (that is, in addition to the driver) to be present on such Passenger Service for the purposes of customer service and/or revenue control. The Passenger Services in respect of which the Franchisee shall plan for an additional Franchisee Employee (that is, in addition to the driver) to be present as required by this paragraph 18.2 are as follows:107

The fact that there is a need to identify a list of services where a second person shall be provided means there is almost certainly a list of services where a second member of staff does not need to be provided. If there were not, then there would be no need for a list of services which do need a second member of staff in the first place.
Even with planning to have a second member of staff on board, there is no guarantee that there will be a second member of staff on board, nor that the requirements will change at some point.

 

[godfreycomplex]

DOO can only be implemented on continuously track circuited lines signalled under TCB I believe - so that's a lot of the Northern network out; and resignalling is not moving very fast (the two major schemes at present are Blackpool and Liverpool; both maybe coming in circa 2018/2019. Liverpool area is track circuited/fully TCB already)
So there will still absolutely need to be guards (well; there needs to be guards everywhere but you catch my drift)
- Through Stockport (including the Chester line)
- Beyond at least New Mills and possibly Marple
- Anything through Bradford Interchange; Rochdale; Hull
- Anything in the North East (except for Morpeth/Chathill)
- Anything beyond Wigan Wallgate
- Anything beyond Lancaster
- Anything beyond Skipton (or anywhere near Carlisle indeed)
- Anything going through Horbury Junction (or that has the potential to divert via Horbury Junction)
- And let us not forget the Harrogate Line
Resignalling will arrive after the new stock (if it arrives at all in most of these areas)
This is by no means to say we shouldn't fight tooth and nail to keep guards on all Northern trains; but reports that (if the worst comes to the worst) the grade will disappear overnight are more than a little wide of the mark.

 

[Greybeard33]

Secondly, the bit missing (in my bold) from the quote above is important:

18.2 Where in accordance with paragraph 18.1, a Passenger Service is operated as Driver
Controlled Operation the Franchisee shall, in preparing the train crew diagram relating to
such Passenger Service plan for an additional Franchise Employee (that is, in addition to
the driver) to be present on such Passenger Service for the purposes of customer service
and/or revenue control. The Passenger Services in respect of which the Franchisee shall
plan for an additional Franchisee Employee (that is, in addition to the driver) to be present
as required by this paragraph 18.2 are as follows: 107

The fact that there is a need to identify a list of services where a second person shall be provided means there is almost certainly a list of services where a second member of staff does not need to be provided. If there were not, then there would be no need for a list of services which do need a second member of staff in the first place.
Even with planning to have a second member of staff on board, there is no guarantee that there will be a second member of staff on board, nor that the requirements will change at some point.

Just to add - the footnote 107 referenced in the above quote says:

107: Where text has been omitted from the document this is because the Director General Rail or Secretary of State
has decided to exclude the text in accordance with the provisions within the Freedom of Information
Act 2000.

Clearly the list of services is considered politically/commercially sensitive.

 

[pemma]

The fact that there is a need to identify a list of services where a second person shall be provided means there is almost certainly a list of services where a second member of staff does not need to be provided. If there were not, then there would be no need for a list of services which do need a second member of staff in the first place.

I think you're reading too much in to it. The way I read that is those are the list of services where a franchise member of staff (with an unspecified job title) will be present instead of a conductor.

Even with planning to have a second member of staff on board, there is no guarantee that there will be a second member of staff on board, nor that the requirements will change at some point.

In the same way the TOC has to plan to run all services. Currently if a guard takes ill the service is cancelled unless an alternative person is found so that allows the option of reducing the number of cancellations due to staff sickness. Of course the TOC should be made to prove they have employed enough staff to be able to cover all services under normal circumstances.

Firstly, DCO is exactly the same as DOO, as the Northern franchise agreement says:

“Driver Controlled Operation” means operation of a train by a driver alone without the need for a conductor (or any other Franchise Employee);
That sounds very much like DOO to me.

Apart from releasing the doors what does the guard do that involves operating the train? Everything else surely comes under providing a service for the passengers rather then operating the train.

 

[NSEFAN]

Firstly, DCO is exactly the same as DOO, as the Northern franchise agreement says:

“Driver Controlled Operation” means operation of a train by a driver alone without the need for a conductor (or any other Franchise Employee);
That sounds very much like DOO to me.

Apart from releasing the doors what does the guard do that involves operating the train? Everything else surely comes under providing a service for the passengers rather then operating the train.

The guard doesn't just open the doors, though. He assists with the dispatch of the train, which involves making sure the PTI is clear and then signalling for the train to start, whilst keeping an eye on the PTI as the train moves out. Realistically the driver can control the train for the rest of the journey on his own, as systems like TPWS have significantly reduced the chance of collisions between trains. The PTI is now therefore probably the greatest risk to passenger safety and should be properly monitored during dispatch, such that the train can be stopped should an incident occur.

As far as I can tell, DCO is where the driver controls the doors, but the guard still dispatches the train and monitors the PTI (as used on Voyagers, for example). It seems however that the actual term DCO appears to have been coined during the discussions about DOO on IEP on the GWML a while back. I get the impression that the waters are being muddied so that the DfT can say, "Oh we're not advocating DOO. We're advocating DCO, that's totally different! Honest!", even though they really would like full DOO-P operation where any extra staff are entirely optional. A rose by any other name...

 

[Bletchleyite]

The PTI is now therefore probably the greatest risk to passenger safety and should be properly monitored during dispatch, such that the train can be stopped should an incident occur.

I agree. But on most of Northern's present stock they cannot do this, because they dispatch from doors with no droplight.

If it's that important (and I would agree it is), those trains need urgent modification to make available a means of looking out along the train, be that a droplight or CCTV, from all guard dispatch positions.

 

[NSEFAN]

I agree. But on most of Northern's present stock they cannot do this, because they dispatch from doors with no droplight.

If it's that important (and I would agree it is), those trains need urgent modification to make available a means of looking out along the train, be that a droplight or CCTV, from all guard dispatch positions.

I agree that droplights (or other such openable windows) would improve PTI safety. Alternatively, the guard having access to the bodyside CCTV feeds would be a good solution. The status quo of guard dispatch is still better IMHO than DOO-P, where once the train begins to move the driver has to focus on the line ahead. At the moment, the guard is at least observing part of the platform and will be more likely to spot if something has gone wrong. Not foolproof, but safer IMHO.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

Latest news I hear is that unions have met with management, management have stated that Government insist on a minimum of 50% DCO by the end of the franchise and reduction in the number of Guards, and that Government will not accept a 'ScotRail deal'.

 

[swt class 450]

I really hope that Northern Rail and the DFT get some common sense and just keep Guards on all trains just how they do at the moment. I hope that this doesnt end up as another GTR type situation.

 

[yorkie]

It doesn't work like that. Northern must do what the DfT asks them to do. There is no point hoping Northern will refuse to co-operate.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Latest news I hear is that unions have met with management, management have stated that Government insist on a minimum of 50% DCO by the end of the franchise and reduction in the number of Guards, and that Government will not accept a 'ScotRail deal'.

How on earth are they going to do that when more than 50% of the services are going to be operated using stock that is not DOO/DCO compatible, and probably cannot easily be converted for cameras due to the body profile?

 

[158756]

How on earth are they going to do that when more than 50% of the services are going to be operated using stock that is not DOO/DCO compatible, and probably cannot easily be converted for cameras due to the body profile?

Easily- if Wikipedia is correct by the end of the franchise they'll have ~170 trains of classes 170,195,319,321,331 and 333, which can (I think 170s can can't they?) run DOO, versus ~185 sprinters. If we assume the newer trains work harder than the sprinters, or complete their journeys faster, it's not unreasonable that slightly less than half the fleet can do 50% of the service.

It's been obvious this was coming since the ITT was published. Not reducing the quality of service/ ability to buy a ticket will just mean every station served by DOO trains just needs a TVM and a help point. I will certainly think twice about using an unstaffed train in East Lancashire though, and the trains will be free unless you get off at Blackburn (though some journeys are with a guard present anyway).

 

[BestWestern]

As far as I can tell, DCO is where the driver controls the doors, but the guard still dispatches the train and monitors the PTI (as used on Voyagers, for example).

The Guard does not dispatch the train with DCO. It is entirely the same as DOO, but with the mystical 'second member of staff' on board. That person might have some degree of safety critical responsibility in the event of an emergency, or none at all. Voyagers are not DCO.

As you've touched upon, DCO was invented recently to avoid use of the 'toxic' term DOO, and to try - unsuccessfully - to skirt around the fact that Guards would be downgraded. As far as railway staff and their unions are concerned, there is precious little difference between the two.

 

[Don King]

Circular No: IR/319/16

TO ALL BRANCHES, REGIONAL OFFICES & REGIONAL COUNCILS

Our Ref: BR2/0146

27th October 2016

Dear Colleague,

NEW ROLLING STOCK CONTRACT & DRIVER ONLY OPERATION (DOO) – ARRIVA RAIL NORTHERN

I have recently received correspondence from the Lead Officer on the company’s intentions to introduce DOO. Following a meeting held with the company’s managing director and his associates, the company informed this union of their intention to introduce Driver Control Operation (DCO). The company further informed us that within the franchise they plan to reduce the current number of guards, with at least 50% of the current train services on the franchise being operated by the driver. Under DCO the driver will have full operational control and sole responsibility for all operational requirements, which included, full door control. The introduction of this change is due to take place once the new rolling stock has been procured.

The meeting exposed a number of alarming issues, such as the franchise agreement required a minimum of 50% DCO across the network. The responses received were also a cause for concern and when pressed on the issue of DCO it was revealed that the Department for Transport are pulling the strings. The managing director advised us that the Secretary of State is dictating and determining such directives and negotiations. Therefore, Arriva are forcefully obliged to adhere to such instructions or face penalties for contravention of the franchise. The company have been informed that although there are political third parties involved, we negotiate with the company. Our Lead officer put forward the proposals that was successful on Abellio ScotRail, however, the company outright stated that the Secretary of State would refuse these proposals and therefore the answer would be that the proposals are unacceptable. This is an alarming and troubling situation and is a clear example of how the government are manipulating franchises to attack hard working individuals and unions. This meeting has clearly highlighted the government’s approach to safety and sheds light on other disputes such as the one on Southern (GTR). The government are putting greed before passengers and slashing safety critical roles to the detriment of staff and passengers.

However, the managing director did indicate that there would be a potential to meet him and his associates to discuss this important issue and to answer any questions the union has. Therefore, I have carried out the National Executive Committees instruction to hold a meeting at Unity House, whereby, Arriva Rail North MD and his associates are invited to attend. The NEC, Lead Officer, Conductors Employee Council Chair and Secretary will also be in attendance. I have also invited ASLE&F’s President, General Secretary and National Executive Committee to attend the meeting.

Additionally, I will be preparing a ballot matrix, in preparation for any industrial action that may be necessary and would greatly appreciate if you could please ensure the details of any Arriva Northern members in your branch are accurate and up-to-date. This can be done by getting members to access their records on the RMT website by accessing the members area and amending them accordingly, alternatively, they can call the RMT Freephone Helpline on 0800 376 3706 where someone will be able to amend their details over the phone.

I would be grateful if you could bring the contents of this Circular to the attention of your Arriva Rail Northern members and I will endeavour to keep you fully advised on any further developments on these matters.

Yours sincerely

Mick Cash
General Secretary


As suspected it is the unholy alliance of the corporate asset stripping Britain hating Tories (who'd rather support the German state railways than their own countrymen) and the DFT behind this...

 

[BestWestern]

Hopefully one more campaign as per GTR, with unexpected levels of public support, and this time without the 'easy wins' for the DfT 'Band of B*stards', just might convince them to leave the railway alone. They're going to look every bit the job wrecking axemen they are with this happening all over the nation. I think ATN could potentially be the last place we see forced DOO for a few years.