Arriva Rail North DOO

[yorksrob]

The basic issue is that a trades union is trying to dictate to a company how that company may run its business.

This is unacceptable - and the RMT is out on a limb. It is attempting to do what no other trades union in the country is attempting.

The other country I know most about is Germany and there the trades unions understand the legal, social and political framework in which they operate - and although they are diligent in protecting and advancing their members' interests they do not try to specify the ways by which the company is run. I know - I was a member of the IG Metall for many years. There is no reason whatsoever - apart from personal intransigence and a distorted view of the world[1] - for the RMT to hold the position it does.

There is a strong moral, economic, social and political need for effective trades unions operating within the law to act as a countervailing force to less than reasonable employers - and there are more of those than one might first think. But this does not mean being pig-headedly intransigent. The political right wing always has a tendency to want to clip the wings of the trades unions, or even ban them depending on the degree of 'rightness'. The danger that Cash does not see is that the continuing strikes will move the boundary of wanting to limit trades unions further towards the centre of the political spectrum. When it becomes mainstream then the position is really worrying.

Effective trades unions are part and parcel of our democratic system - their existence must not be put into question. Democracy does not only exist in politics but is the very warp and weft of our lives.

[1] The language used in its press releases demonstrate this. They show no understanding of the wider world and are aimed only at its own members and supporters. It's an identical attitude to that shown by Donald Trump who's every utterance is designed to appeal to his power base regardless of the effect it has on the rest of the world.

I disagree with the current industrial action, and I don't believe that the RMT would be right to oppose any change to the guards role.

Nevertheless, I am enough of a realist to understand that there is not going to be any major legislation restricting the power of the RMT in the near future, and that the only way to get a working train service is to make mutually beneficial compromise with it.

I also understand that DO/GC has the potential to bring most of the operational benefits of DCO without the strife, thereforeas a pragmatist, I would like to see it brought forward as a way of reaching a quick conclusion to this disastrous strike which is causing so much damage to the economy here.

I am also suitably impressed by @Tomnick's well articulated arguments that DO/GC is at least as good a way of operating trains, if not better than DCO.

 

[wils180]

Im only talking about the time wasted while the guard closes the doors looks up and down gets on closes their local door gives 2 on the buzzer driver gives 2 back as opposed to DOO where driver closes the doors and goes.

DOO drivers don’t just press the button and go on interlock, certainly not at my TOC.


Driver open guard close seems like a ridiculously simple compromise to this, perhaps too simple. I have this method of work. There is a customer service/ revenue benefit to be bad; but it is extremely minimal. You can just about finish up a few tickets or helping someone with a connection, but there’s no way you’re going to be stood in the aisle blocking everyone and everything whilst trying to sell a ticket. You’re going to be on the platform, checking to see if anyone needs assistance, be it a wheelchair or someone with a heavy bag. Likewise you can hurry people along or simply explain the benefits of using more than 1 of the 18 doors to board the train (further time saving).
Also, the amount of questions you get stood on the platform is crazy too, wether it’s about your trains calling points, or ‘is this ticket valid’, ‘where is unreserved’, ‘where do I change’, ‘where is platform X’, ‘where is the costa’ - the list goes on. Surely that’s as much of a wider customer service benefit as any?

This debate is endless. I understand driver open guard close doesn’t meet the franchise requirement, which I think is a great shame, as it really does appease both sides and in my opinion, give the best of both worlds.
With the current non negotiable position from all involved, I don’t see this dispute ending anytime soon.

 

[Carlisle]

This debate is endless. I understand driver open guard close doesn’t meet the franchise requirement, which I think is a great shame, as it really does appease both sides and in my opinion, give the best of both worlds.
.

Quite the opposite in practice, as it’ll ultimately cost northern more than the present system (drivers are unlikely to agree door release without a financial incentive), for no gain whatsoever in staff or operational flexibility or indeed cost savings anywhere else, as guards will still require all current competenceies for any northern train to actually run anywhere in passanger service.

 

[wils180]

as it’ll ultimately cost northern more than the present system (drivers are unlikely to agree door release without a financial incentive)

Very true

 

[CN75]

We’ve already established that Southern’s OBSs are required to position themselves at a set of doors to observe the platform at each station (a precedent that I’m certain would have to be followed for any new DOO implementation), so there is absolutely no “revenue and customer service” benefit to be achieved by relieving them of dispatch duties.

Guards must be in particular parts of trains and dispatch them in certain inflexible ways. On Board Supervisors do not. This is potentially a significant revenue and customer service benefit. Guards must be route and train specific, and certified and managed accordingly, in order to be able to operate their trains. On Board Supervisors do not (to the same degree, anyway). The customer will see more of an On Board Supervisor who will spend better time on them and it is sensible for them to know who is getting on and off. As anyone working or travelling in the railway will know, some Guards have steadfastly refused to accept the key future purpose of their job is no longer indispensable and operational.

Indeed. A little bit of flexibility will help everybody. It helped Scotrail passengers and it helped Greater Anglia passengers. Let the DfT show some flexibility up here and hopefully the RMT will show flexibility by moving to driver open/guard close as well.

Guards originally had nothing to do with closing doors, but power door stock arrived and for one reason or another the buttons on the driver’s desk were not used in much of the country. Network SouthEast and various early TOCs brought in driver opening at various times without much in the way of resistance from any party. It is not a major compromise from Arriva, no major benefit and achieves next to none of the customer service, punctuality or reliability objectives that Arriva and the DfT are seeking.

If changing to driver open/guard close is what's been occurring elsewhere for decades, why on earth bother changing it. What meagre benefits the OBS system might provide in no way justify the upheaval.

If the DfT are so desperate to introduce such a system, they should have done it when the trains were equipped to do so. They didn't, so they should back down and get the trains running pronto.

This dispute was over the RMT seeking an agreement from Arriva that they would not introduce DOO-P. The RMT knew from the franchise agreement that Arriva could not give that guarantee. Then the strikes started. The DfT did not wish to introduce DOO before the trains it could work with were introduced, and still does not.

The OBS system has led to Southern becoming strike-free with more staff on more money and when Southern have major delays, they can get the trains moving again quickly. Hardly meagre benefits, and something a significant population of the country had to put up with nearly two years of diabolical service caused by industrial action for.

The ASLEF/Southern agreement is that services can run without the booked second member of staff under certain circumstances but industrial action is not included. Although, I suppose you could say if the agreement is the second person doesn't have to be trained to do doors, dispatch etc. then it would be easier to get office based staff to cover.

Southern has used office staff as On Board Supervisors during strikes. Doubtless the training required is lighter but the trains can run and by all accounts Southern run a full timetable during their strikes now, even working with the ASLEF agreement. As the RMT does not recognise On Board Supervisors or represent them, it must be assumed the RMT is willingly participating in making itself irrelevant at that company.

 

[Dave1987]

Dave

A serious point - I know you like to veer off into politics whenever you see the opportunity (and I'll also get back on topic after this post!) but I honestly don't believe that any credible government, including the Tories, will want to attempt any form of ban on unions or strikes. We all know that the various laws have been tightened up over the years and, for most of the people, most of the time, it now works well. It's only really topical at the moment because the RMT is taking action over a number of areas of the country (albeit it actually affects only a small % of the population - and some guys on a Rail Forum.......).

.

Robert I’ve never heard the Government have a single good thing to say about ANY union let alone the RMT. So don’t tell me they wouldn’t take more action to nullify unions or get rid of them if they thought they could get it through Parliament.

 

[Bevan Price]

Robert I’ve never heard the Government have a single good thing to say about ANY union let alone the RMT. So don’t tell me they wouldn’t take more action to nullify unions or get rid of them if they thought they could get it through Parliament.

In my opinion, Mr Cash & RMT are unwittingly becoming "vote catchers" for right wing tories at the next election - just like Mr Scargill was in the Thatcher era.

 

[Robertj21a]

Robert I’ve never heard the Government have a single good thing to say about ANY union let alone the RMT. So don’t tell me they wouldn’t take more action to nullify unions or get rid of them if they thought they could get it through Parliament.

It's true that the Tories and the Unions have little in common but most people understand that large groups of staff employed by some of the biggest organisations may benefit from Trade Union involvement at local level. As far as I'm concerned, this is where they are at their best. Most of them seem quite happy to stick to that role. It only becomes a problem when you get a union like the RMT (and the NUM/Scargill) that want to take on a far more political "See if we can overthrow this Tory government and put in a Labour one, much more to our liking" that people recognise that they are over-stepping the mark.
As far as I'm concerned, Trade Unions can be very useful, particularly at local level, but the RMT should stop the FatCats, German owners, Tories and other silly rants that make them look even more childish than usual.

[Yes, I did originally say that I'd get back on-topic, so I'd better stop there! )

 

[coppercapped]

I disagree with the current industrial action, and I don't believe that the RMT would be right to oppose any change to the guards role.

Nevertheless, I am enough of a realist to understand that there is not going to be any major legislation restricting the power of the RMT in the near future, and that the only way to get a working train service is to make mutually beneficial compromise with it.

I also understand that DO/GC has the potential to bring most of the operational benefits of DCO without the strife, thereforeas a pragmatist, I would like to see it brought forward as a way of reaching a quick conclusion to this disastrous strike which is causing so much damage to the economy here.

I am also suitably impressed by @Tomnick's well articulated arguments that DO/GC is at least as good a way of operating trains, if not better than DCO.

You misunderstand the source of most of the financial benefits to the TOC arising from the introduction of DOO or DCO. These come from the avoidance of the extra costs incurred as a result of perturbation in the service for whatever reason. These can be caused by engineering overruns, infrastructure failures, rolling stock failures, train delays putting staff out of place, unexpected illness, trespassers, level crossing incidents, suicides and so on and so forth.

The costs in terms of planning overheads, ecs running and cancelled passenger workings as a result of any or all of the above should not be underestimated. These costs stem from all sorts of scenarios such as having to get all the passengers to detrain after part of the journey, because the guard either did not appear or had to leave because another service would otherwise have to be cancelled, after which the train ran ecs to its intended terminus. The TOC was liable to pay compensation to the delayed passengers, some taxis and the overheads of having to manage all the knock-on effects. Each individual incident may not have broken the bank, but the sum total of many such incidents was considerable. Somewhere I remember reading an article or paper about the extra costs which a TOC had calculated it incurred in the course of a year as a result of disruption from any cause as being two or three per cent of its turnover - not much but the same order of magnitude as its expected profits. So quite noticeable. (I'm sorry, I can't recall where I read it - it may have been a newspaper article rather than being in one of the railway journals, it was three or four years ago and it was not written with specific reference to DOO or DCO).

The point is that the extra flexibility offered by DOO/DCO would help to reduce these costs which are bigger than trying to shave a few seconds off the dwell time at stations. The savings from this source, with some marginal extra income from reduced journey times, really only become significant if journey time can be sufficiently reduced that a service can be run with one or more fewer train sets. Not having to have a guard on a train under such circumstances reduces the number of constraints (is a guard available? does he/she have the correct route or traction knowledge? does he/she go 'out of hours' at the end of the journey? etc., etc.) that the control staff face when trying to recover the service.

This is not, repeat not, an argument for running trains generally with only one person on board. Passengers like seeing a member of staff on a train for a number of reasons and as far as I know there is no TOC, apart from one or two running very intense 'metro' style services where a second staff member can hardly move through the train, who have stated they want to introduce this method of train operation. Northern operates no services which are the equivalent to the Great Eastern suburban service out of Liverpool Street or the south-eastern services out of Cannon Street in terms of traffic density, train length or frequency.

 

[CaptainHaddock]

In my opinion, Mr Cash & RMT are unwittingly becoming "vote catchers" for right wing tories at the next election - just like Mr Scargill was in the Thatcher era.

Indeed. The current strikes are a glimpse of what life would be like under a Corbyn government all the time, never mind just Saturdays. I wonder why he hasn't come out and condemned the RMT for preventing ordinary working class people getting to work? Anybody would think the trade union movement are his paymasters.....

 

[HowardGWR]

Indeed. The current strikes are a glimpse of what life would be like under a Corbyn government all the time, never mind just Saturdays. I wonder why he hasn't come out and condemned the RMT for preventing ordinary working class people getting to work? Anybody would think the trade union movement are his paymasters.....

Well, the RMT isn't. Corbyn owes them nothing.

 

[Andyh82]

Another week another dodgy TV report about the strike. On Look North it basically went along the lines of...

• RMT want to keep the guard, Northern want driver only operation.
• The reason for the strike according to the RMT is to ensure accessibility for disabled passengers
• The local Labour MP supports the strike and says it’s about time the government took the private operator to account.

You’ll be able to see the short report on the iPlayer until teatime Sunday

So viewers will take away from the report that Northern want no second member of staff on any service, as a result no disabled passengers will be able to travel, and it’s all Northern’s own decision.

 

[Gems]

Indeed. The current strikes are a glimpse of what life would be like under a Corbyn government all the time, never mind just Saturdays. I wonder why he hasn't come out and condemned the RMT for preventing ordinary working class people getting to work? Anybody would think the trade union movement are his paymasters.....

You're having a glimpse of strikes under a dysfunctional Tory government. But perhaps you are wrong, maybe under a less confrontational government everyone might be a little happier.
But non of what you say stacks up. There is nothing to stop us having a week long strike if we fancied it, it is only our desire to target the management and try to minimise the disruption Monday to Friday that stops us.
What you want to do is go ask Northern why after all this time they can only run a skeleton service on a Saturday. Could it be that even their managers have had enough of their antics.
This time next week you will have another long list of Saturday dates to moan about.

 

[gazzaa2]

You're having a glimpse of strikes under a dysfunctional Tory government. But perhaps you are wrong, maybe under a less confrontational government everyone might be a little happier.
But non of what you say stacks up. There is nothing to stop us having a week long strike if we fancied it, it is only our desire to target the management and try to minimise the disruption Monday to Friday that stops us.
What you want to do is go ask Northern why after all this time they can only run a skeleton service on a Saturday. Could it be that even their managers have had enough of their antics.
This time next week you will have another long list of Saturday dates to moan about.

They were happy to strike during the week for months.

They've settled on Saturdays so at least they get their weekend free and avoid the Saturday night drunks

 

[Gems]

They were happy to strike during the week for months.

They've settled on Saturdays so at least they get their weekend free and avoid the Saturday night drunks

Monday to Friday strikes were a mistake. Must admit though, don't miss the drunks.

 

[Gems]

In my opinion, Mr Cash & RMT are unwittingly becoming "vote catchers" for right wing tories at the next election - just like Mr Scargill was in the Thatcher era.

Vivid imagination. Interesting that the only time in months Northern held a 'Meet the manager' session it had to be in leafy Congleton with the resident Tory MP coming along to say her piece.
Now why don't they hold one in Wigan, Manchester, or Ormskirk?

 

[Robertj21a]

You're having a glimpse of strikes under a dysfunctional Tory government. But perhaps you are wrong, maybe under a less confrontational government everyone might be a little happier.
But non of what you say stacks up. There is nothing to stop us having a week long strike if we fancied it, it is only our desire to target the management and try to minimise the disruption Monday to Friday that stops us.
What you want to do is go ask Northern why after all this time they can only run a skeleton service on a Saturday. Could it be that even their managers have had enough of their antics.
This time next week you will have another long list of Saturday dates to moan about.

If you were one of the managers wouldn't you be fed up by now ? Not sure why you feel that affects the key points of the dispute.

Why do you believe that the RMT refuse to properly co-operate ? - sheer stubborness, fear of it being a slippery slope etc etc...
.

 

[Gems]

If you were one of the managers wouldn't you be fed up by now ? Not sure why you feel that affects the key points of the dispute.

Why do you believe that the RMT refuse to properly co-operate ? - sheer stubborness, fear of it being a slippery slope etc etc...
.

I'd be very fed up by now, but that is the intention, to make them fed up.

We are not here to co-operate. How can you co-operate with a untrustworthy company backed by a untrustworthy government. The problem is this, nobody believes a word they say, they have a very serious problem when it comes to being trusted.

 

[footprints]

This time next week you will have another long list of Saturday dates to moan about.

And staff will have a sizable reduction in their pay confirmed for the foreseeable future, with an inevitability that the long list of new strike dates will achieve the same as the 40 previous walkouts, i.e. absolutely nothing.

It's 'lose, lose' then for passengers and guards. A stunning achievement for Mick and his basket case union.

 

[pemma]

Another week another dodgy TV report about the strike. On Look North it basically went along the lines of...

• RMT want to keep the guard, Northern want driver only operation.
• The reason for the strike according to the RMT is to ensure accessibility for disabled passengers
• The local Labour MP supports the strike and says it’s about time the government took the private operator to account.

You’ll be able to see the short report on the iPlayer until teatime Sunday

So viewers will take away from the report that Northern want no second member of staff on any service, as a result no disabled passengers will be able to travel, and it’s all Northern’s own decision.

And RMT supporters all over Twitter are saying they support the strike because they want guards to help disabled passengers, as if someone whose job title isn't guard will just stand/sit and watch a disabled passenger on a platform and do nothing. :roll:

 

[Gems]

And staff will have a sizable reduction in their pay confirmed for the foreseeable future, with an inevitability that the long list of new strike dates will achieve the same as the 40 previous walkouts, i.e. absolutely nothing.

It's 'lose, lose' then for passengers and guards. A stunning achievement for Mick and his basket case union.

Ah, but if we really were troubled by losing money, we would go into work. But nobody does.
Yes it is bad for the passengers I agree, but I think that by looking at the rather pathetic service Northern can muster, it is obvious it is achieving something. There are many, many strikes in all industries that don't achieve their aim, doesn't mean everyone has to roll over.

 

[Gems]

And RMT supporters all over Twitter are saying they support the strike because they want guards to help disabled passengers, as if someone whose job title isn't guard will just stand/sit and watch a disabled passenger on a platform and do nothing. :roll:

Well lets play devils advocate.

1) Will someone who is purely selling tickets on the train notice a disabled passenger on the platform?
2) Why did Northern keep insisting they wanted to explore the idea of no second person on the trains until TFN stepped in.
3) Why do Northern keep coming out with the rather pathetic line of "We want the RMT to help shape the future roll when they have no ideas of their own"?

 

[Robertj21a]

I'd be very fed up by now, but that is the intention, to make them fed up.

We are not here to co-operate. How can you co-operate with a untrustworthy company backed by a untrustworthy government. The problem is this, nobody believes a word they say, they have a very serious problem when it comes to being trusted.

Not sure that I really see that making managers fed up is likely to do anything at all to progress matters. All the TOC needs to do is cancel more Saturday trains. Perhaps I just don't understand RMT thinking - it always comes over like a child throwing his toys out of the pram because he's not getting his way.

Trust has to be earned - so the RMT is just as guilty as the TOC.

 

[Carlisle]

We are not here to co-operate. How can you co-operate with a untrustworthy company.

If you were indeed working for an untrustworthy company , they’d have dismissed all strikers who wouldn’t sign up to new contracts, many months ago, I speak from experience having worked for 2 or 3 truly dodgy employers .

 

[Robertj21a]

Well lets play devils advocate.

1) Will someone who is purely selling tickets on the train notice a disabled passenger on the platform?
2) Why did Northern keep insisting they wanted to explore the idea of no second person on the trains until TFN stepped in.
3) Why do Northern keep coming out with the rather pathetic line of "We want the RMT to help shape the future roll when they have no ideas of their own"?

1. Yes, just like guards claim they do.

2. It's supposed to be a negotiation. Arriva had already given away the 'No redundancies'.

3. The Arriva team keep giving and yet the RMT do little or nothing to move matters forward. Why should Arriva do more ?

 

[Gems]

If you were indeed working for an untrustworthy company , they’d have dismissed all strikers who wouldn’t sign up to new contracts, many months ago, I speak from experience having worked for 2 or 3 truly dodgy employers .

Well there is a little problem of not having a single train capable of DCO to consider.
There is also the little problem of getting ASLEF to agree.
Then there is mass claims at industrial tribunals that could come about.

 

[Eccles1983]

1. Yes, just like guards claim they do.

2. It's supposed to be a negotiation. Arriva had already given away the 'No redundancies'.

3. The Arriva team keep giving and yet the RMT do little or nothing to move matters forward. Why should Arriva do more ?

You keep harping on about the no redundancies - they cannot do it logically. It's an empty promise as the vast majority of trains need a guard anyway for the length of the franchise. It's the next one where new doo trains will come more prevalent.

So it's hardly a concession. It's reality.

The arriva team have given nothing. You are not involved in the negotiations or know anyone in them. But you continue to claim that it's fair and above board. I know the folk on both sides.

If I was in negotiations with anyone who behaved the way that the company has I would go nuclear.

 

[yorksrob]

And staff will have a sizable reduction in their pay confirmed for the foreseeable future, with an inevitability that the long list of new strike dates will achieve the same as the 40 previous walkouts, i.e. absolutely nothing.

It's 'lose, lose' then for passengers and guards. A stunning achievement for Mick and his basket case union.

Has there been a long list of new strike dates ?

 

[Gems]

Has there been a long list of new strike dates ?

Not yet, but give it until Thursday. Fairly sure the Saturday theme will continue, just a question of how many will be called.

 

[yorksrob]

Not yet, but give it until Thursday. Fairly sure the Saturday theme will continue, just a question of how many will be called.

Well, I can't say as I'm extatic, but thanks for the heads up.