Arriva Rail North DOO

[northwichcat]

In the last 15 years rail services have become a lot more important, which I think is why it doesn't seem that long ago we would have had no service when guards were on strike, now we have managers acting as guards. I think if it was decided managers acting as guards isn't safe then the government would start reviewing strike laws to prevent essential services being shut down e.g. maybe only allowing 33% of members to be on strike at a given time. The same would go for schools if parents started complaining about non-teaching staff supervising their children when teachers were on strike. The guards who aren't happy about managers covering their role need to be careful what they wish for.

Relating to alternative arrangements for the Northern strike I've noticed Northern have been poorly advising passengers on alternative bus services, both on their website and on Twitter. For instance, they told someone from Congleton to use the 99 bus to get to Macclesfield. The 99 is a D&G Bus service, while the 38 Crewe to Macclesfield via Congleton is an Arriva bus, which starts earlier, finishes later and runs more frequently. Being an Arriva bus valid rail tickets are also accepted. I'd put this down to lazy Googling by Northern staff e.g. if they type in Macclesfield to Congleton bus the 99 is likely to come up as a more relevant result than the 38.

 

[LowLevel]

In the last 15 years rail services have become a lot more important, which I think is why it doesn't seem that long ago we would have had no service when guards were on strike, now we have managers acting as guards. I think if it was decided managers acting as guards isn't safe then the government would start reviewing strike laws to prevent essential services being shut down e.g. maybe only allowing 33% of members to be on strike at a given time. The same would go for schools if parents started complaining about non-teaching staff supervising their children when teachers were on strike. The guards who aren't happy about managers covering their role need to be careful what they wish for.

Relating to alternative arrangements for the Northern strike I've noticed Northern have been poorly advising passengers on alternative bus services, both on their website and on Twitter. For instance, they told someone from Congleton to use the 99 bus to get to Macclesfield. The 99 is a D&G Bus service, while the 38 Crewe to Macclesfield via Congleton is an Arriva bus, which starts earlier, finishes later and runs more frequently. Being an Arriva bus valid rail tickets are also accepted. I'd put this down to lazy Googling by Northern staff e.g. if they type in Macclesfield to Congleton bus the 99 is likely to come up as a more relevant result than the 38.

My issue is less with the fact they are there covering at all, that's a fact of life I can't prevent (after all either they're a total waste of time in their day jobs if you can just manage without them all or it has an alternative impact to the company in their own reduced productivity, pick which pleases you most), it's about the fact they receive less training to carry out a safety critical role.

It should be full training or no training, and definitely not 2 days to learn a 400 mile round trip Intercity route with lots and lots of stations.

 

[Andrew32]

My issue is less with the fact they are there covering at all, that's a fact of life I can't prevent (after all either they're a total waste of time in their day jobs if you can just manage without them all or it has an alternative impact to the company in their own reduced productivity, pick which pleases you most), it's about the fact they receive less training to carry out a safety critical role.

It should be full training or no training, and definitely not 2 days to learn a 400 mile round trip Intercity route with lots and lots of stations.

If ASLEF want a fully trained guard on every train then why are they happy to run these services with a person with minimal training?

Not a criticism, I'm just curious.

 

[Robertj21a]

My issue is less with the fact they are there covering at all, that's a fact of life I can't prevent (after all either they're a total waste of time in their day jobs if you can just manage without them all or it has an alternative impact to the company in their own reduced productivity, pick which pleases you most), it's about the fact they receive less training to carry out a safety critical role.

It should be full training or no training, and definitely not 2 days to learn a 400 mile round trip Intercity route with lots and lots of stations.

Who has the final say as to whether the training is 'sufficient' - operator, Regulator/other ?

 

[LowLevel]

It's for the operator to decide nowadays and they carry the can if it goes wrong - the same goes for most railway processes now. There doesn't seem to be much of an appetite to look into route learning for contingency guards though for some odd reason.

As for the drivers, they have no choice - if the person present has relevant certification saying they're a guard that's it. What they can do is refuse to work with them if they drop a clanger.

 

[mtbox]

If ASLEF want a fully trained guard on every train then why are they happy to run these services with a person with minimal training?

Not a criticism, I'm just curious.

That's a very good question, and one to which quite a lot of ASLEF drivers at the various companies currently in disputes would like to know the answer to!

The silence from ASLEF on this matter, particularly regarding Northern, is deafening!

 

[Bletchleyite]

If ASLEF want a fully trained guard on every train then why are they happy to run these services with a person with minimal training?

Not a criticism, I'm just curious.

They aren't happy and often criticise it, but as these people are not in the dispute there is nothing they can actually do about it.

 

[Moonshot]

They aren't happy and often criticise it, but as these people are not in the dispute there is nothing they can actually do about it.

Do you think ASLEF should be banging the drum in tandem with the RMT and take a stance with Northern on DOO? Surely the fact that 50% of Northern services are planned to be DOO wil have an impact on the driver workload?

 

[Starmill]

...after all either they're a total waste of time in their day jobs if you can just manage without them all or it has an alternative impact to the company in their own reduced productivity, pick which pleases you most...

This is a little unfair. Most management staff could have at least one day off their usual job without it affecting their overall performance very much, even if it's at short notice. What they have to do is just as important to running the train as the driver's job is, but it's not nearly so urgent. It simply needs to be done at some point, whereas the guard needs to be there right now.

I do agree though if they are going to have long hours (do the office staff mind doing 10 hour shifts out on the train? It's probably quite exhausting if it's very different to what you usually do...) at short notice more than once then you would start to ask questions about their regular work that is piling up undone. When you have 3 consecutive days of it then you start to worry. Although such a small number of trains have been running during this strike I wonder how much work the mangers have actually done.

 

[LowLevel]

This is a little unfair. Most management staff could have at least one day off their usual job without it affecting their overall performance very much, even if it's at short notice. What they have to do is just as important to running the train as the driver's job is, but it's not nearly so urgent. It simply needs to be done at some point, whereas the guard needs to be there right now.

I do agree though if they are going to have long hours (do the office staff mind doing 10 hour shifts out on the train? It's probably quite exhausting if it's very different to what you usually do...) at short notice more than once then you would start to ask questions about their regular work that is piling up undone. When you have 3 consecutive days of it then you start to worry. Although such a small number of trains have been running during this strike I wonder how much work the mangers have actually done.

I did say you can pick your choice, both have been suggested in various quarters, which you decide to consider reasonable is up to you

 

[Andrew32]

Is there a way to view the actual, no redacted version of the Arriva franchise agreement?

Just thought I'd ask.

 

[northwichcat]

Is there a way to view the actual, no redacted version of the Arriva franchise agreement?

Just thought I'd ask.

Not unless you get a civil service job in DfT, work for Arriva management or similar. Then if you did and you publicly shared the information you'd be sacked for misconduct.

 

[northwichcat]

My issue is less with the fact they are there covering at all, that's a fact of life I can't prevent (after all either they're a total waste of time in their day jobs if you can just manage without them all or it has an alternative impact to the company in their own reduced productivity, pick which pleases you most), it's about the fact they receive less training to carry out a safety critical role.

It should be full training or no training, and definitely not 2 days to learn a 400 mile round trip Intercity route with lots and lots of stations.

I imagine the management will work 6 or 7 consecutive days to get all their work done alongside the on board work if needed. Managers aren't normally work shy even if they may not fully understand the roles and responsibilities of the people who report to them.

 

[Moonshot]

I imagine the management will work 6 or 7 consecutive days to get all their work done alongside the on board work if needed. Managers aren't normally work shy even if they may not fully understand the roles and responsibilities of the people who report to them.

Its worth pointing out that the vast majority of stand in guards covering strike action are in fact operational managers in the form of Driver and Conductor team managers.

 

[313103]

Its worth pointing out that the vast majority of stand in guards covering strike action are in fact operational managers in the form of Driver and Conductor team managers.

Not from this one company though. The law is against workers in this country. All the power exists with the company owners (as it once did when we sent people to Australia). I have known stand in Guards work trains during industrial disputes from other companies with hardly any training in the area they are working, yes they maybe managers but doing the job and all its intricacies in your company is a lot different then doing it in another company 300 miles away. They all do it. However if i want support to help there is no one i can call upon. What the managers fail to realise is that often when the grade has gone, they go to.

 

[scrapy]

I imagine the management will work 6 or 7 consecutive days to get all their work done alongside the on board work if needed. Managers aren't normally work shy even if they may not fully understand the roles and responsibilities of the people who report to them.

A fair amount of these are only working because they have been threatened in writing with disciplinary action if they don't work. They are only doing hours which can be enforced in their contract.

In response to the previous post about Aslef not getting involved. An increasing number of drivers are getting frustrated with this, however because Northern have not yet approached them with a proposal for DOO operation they are not yet involved in the dispute. Until then any action by Aslef could be seen as political and they may not have legitimate grounds for action. They do not want another costly court case and risk paying damages they can't afford.

 

[Moonshot]

Not from this one company though. The law is against workers in this country. All the power exists with the company owners (as it once did when we sent people to Australia). I have known stand in Guards work trains during industrial disputes from other companies with hardly any training in the area they are working, yes they maybe managers but doing the job and all its intricacies in your company is a lot different then doing it in another company 300 miles away. They all do it. However if i want support to help there is no one i can call upon. What the managers fail to realise is that often when the grade has gone, they go to.

As far as I am aware . only Northern managers were covering services running on strike days.....of course CTMs will be well aware of the potential of their own grade disappearing. however in this case , there will still be plenty of guards in the tradiotional role as the requirement is for 50% of trains to be DOO. As of right now however, it doesnt translate into hard numbers of staff - nobody seems to know just exactly how many traditional guards are actually needed to run services 3 years in the future.

 

[northwichcat]

In response to the previous post about Aslef not getting involved. An increasing number of drivers are getting frustrated with this, however because Northern have not yet approached them with a proposal for DOO operation they are not yet involved in the dispute. Until then any action by Aslef could be seen as political and they may not have legitimate grounds for action. They do not want another costly court case and risk paying damages they can't afford.

I thought the RMT only started a dispute because the asked Northern for a guarantee of a guard on every service after seeing the franchise spec and Northern couldn't give that. ASLEF could ask for a guarantee of a guard to dispatch the train and be just as much in a dispute as the RMT. However, to me it sounds like ASLEF know better than to try the RMT's approach - maybe because if they approach Northern it might speed up the introduction of DCO, whereas if they sit around waiting form Northern to come to then it might slow it down.

 

[northwichcat]

50% of trains to be DOO.

No it's 50% of passenger mileage, which is why I suspect they have chosen Northern Connect services for DCO - it gets them up to the 50% figure allowing them to retain more guards than if they chose services like Manchester to Rose Hill Marple/Buxton etc.

 

[Moonshot]

I thought the RMT only started a dispute because the asked Northern for a guarantee of a guard on every service after seeing the franchise spec and Northern couldn't give that. ASLEF could ask for a guarantee of a guard to dispatch the train and be just as much in a dispute as the RMT. However, to me it sounds like ASLEF know better than to try the RMT's approach - maybe because if they approach Northern it might speed up the introduction of DCO, whereas if they sit around waiting form Northern to come to then it might slow it down.

Maybe ASLEF realise it will strengthen their hand in future pay negotiations - more responsiblility for drivers equals more pay !!

 

[Moonshot]

No it's 50% of passenger mileage, which is why I suspect they have chosen Northern Connect services for DCO - it gets them up to the 50% figure allowing them to retain more guards than if they chose services like Manchester to Rose Hill Marple/Buxton etc.

Indeed ....a good number of Northern stations are not worth the investment in despatch equipment - its actually more economical to employ guards.

 

[muz379]

I thought the RMT only started a dispute because the asked Northern for a guarantee of a guard on every service after seeing the franchise spec and Northern couldn't give that. ASLEF could ask for a guarantee of a guard to dispatch the train and be just as much in a dispute as the RMT. However, to me it sounds like ASLEF know better than to try the RMT's approach - maybe because if they approach Northern it might speed up the introduction of DCO, whereas if they sit around waiting form Northern to come to then it might slow it down.

Indeed RMT did approach the company in a meeting and ask for the two guarantees which have now placed them in dispute with the company because they could not offer those guarantees .

There would be nothing to stop ASLEF if they wanted asking for a guarantee that its members would not be expected to operate doors on trains for the duration of the franchise . And a refusal from the company to give this guarantee could then also place them in dispute . And if balloted over this dispute I suspect a large number of drivers would vote for industrial action over this .

You have to ask then why ASLEF have not decided to tackle the elephant in the room head on in the same way that RMT have .

Personally I think that the answer lies in the number of court cases that ASLEF have had to bear heavy losses in during the southern dispute and fears around the same happening in any other dispute they enter into

I think some of it is also down to the fact that there are other talks going on with ASLEF at the moment centred around harmonising terms and conditions and getting Sundays in the week . And as we know Sundays in the week is in the ASLEF charter and would lead to an increase in members thus more money so not surprisingly a priority for the leadership of the union. Going into dispute would grind any other talks to a halt . Hence the reason that the RMT are currently not in talks for harmonisation or Sundays in the week .

No it's 50% of passenger mileage, which is why I suspect they have chosen Northern Connect services for DCO - it gets them up to the 50% figure allowing them to retain more guards than if they chose services like Manchester to Rose Hill Marple/Buxton etc.

I dont really think that their choice of route/rolling stock / service patterns for DCO is informed by a willingness to retain as many guards as possible .

It is informed by the operational realities . These northern connect services are going to be operated by brand new rolling stock which is built for DOO and calling at limited stations whereby it will be easier to ensure guaranteed staffing and accessibility levels at stations .

There simply is no reality in the idea that other routes and other rolling stock are going to be made ready for DOO by 2020 . To start with they are limited by the infrastructure upgrades that network rail can provide . And there are issues with making some of the current rolling stock compliant with current standards for DOO . But i firmly believe if the government had thought it was possible to make the whole thing DCO they would have specified that because after-all 100% DCO brings about 50% more of the supposed benefits of DCO than what is specified in this franchise .

Indeed ....a good number of Northern stations are not worth the investment in despatch equipment - its actually more economical to employ guards.

What equipment are we talking about here . Given that any further rollout of DOO is going to be using bodyside cameras fitted to trains

Only the busiest stations will need additional equipment like CD & RA indicators .

A lot of stations might need work doing to straighten out platforms . Improve lighting and visibility but apart from maintenance costs for lighting those are one off costs that whilst might not result in benefit over the terms of one franchise will result in a long term reduction in government subsidies .Which is the driving force behind these operational changes

 

[northwichcat]

It is informed by the operational realities . These northern connect services are going to be operated by brand new rolling stock which is built for DOO and calling at limited stations whereby it will be easier to ensure guaranteed staffing and accessibility levels at stations .

While bidders had to deliver new self-powered trains it was not a requirement to put the new trains on Northern Connect routes. Refurbished 158s, 170s and 365s could have been used for Northern Connect services while a brand new DMU order could have been used for diesel commuter routes around cities like Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds and Sheffield (similar to the LM franchise.) It was also not a requirement to introduce as many Northern Connect routes as Arriva plan to - only the ex-TPE routes had to become 'Northern Connect' standard, the rest would have given Arriva extra quality points which might have resulted in them winning the franchise ahead of another bidder like Govia.

 

[Moonshot]

Indeed RMT did approach the company in a meeting and ask for the two guarantees which have now placed them in dispute with the company because they could not offer those guarantees .

There would be nothing to stop ASLEF if they wanted asking for a guarantee that its members would not be expected to operate doors on trains for the duration of the franchise . And a refusal from the company to give this guarantee could then also place them in dispute . And if balloted over this dispute I suspect a large number of drivers would vote for industrial action over this .

You have to ask then why ASLEF have not decided to tackle the elephant in the room head on in the same way that RMT have .

Personally I think that the answer lies in the number of court cases that ASLEF have had to bear heavy losses in during the southern dispute and fears around the same happening in any other dispute they enter into

I think some of it is also down to the fact that there are other talks going on with ASLEF at the moment centred around harmonising terms and conditions and getting Sundays in the week . And as we know Sundays in the week is in the ASLEF charter and would lead to an increase in members thus more money so not surprisingly a priority for the leadership of the union. Going into dispute would grind any other talks to a halt . Hence the reason that the RMT are currently not in talks for harmonisation or Sundays in the week .



I dont really think that their choice of route/rolling stock / service patterns for DCO is informed by a willingness to retain as many guards as possible .

It is informed by the operational realities . These northern connect services are going to be operated by brand new rolling stock which is built for DOO and calling at limited stations whereby it will be easier to ensure guaranteed staffing and accessibility levels at stations .

There simply is no reality in the idea that other routes and other rolling stock are going to be made ready for DOO by 2020 . To start with they are limited by the infrastructure upgrades that network rail can provide . And there are issues with making some of the current rolling stock compliant with current standards for DOO . But i firmly believe if the government had thought it was possible to make the whole thing DCO they would have specified that because after-all 100% DCO brings about 50% more of the supposed benefits of DCO than what is specified in this franchise .


What equipment are we talking about here . Given that any further rollout of DOO is going to be using bodyside cameras fitted to trains

Only the busiest stations will need additional equipment like CD & RA indicators .

A lot of stations might need work doing to straighten out platforms . Improve lighting and visibility but apart from maintenance costs for lighting those are one off costs that whilst might not result in benefit over the terms of one franchise will result in a long term reduction in government subsidies .Which is the driving force behind these operational changes

Indeed.....and in some places like Accrington, that will be impossible unless the railway was radically re engineered.

 

[scrapy]

People talk about 50% DOO. The invitation to tender stated a minimum of 50% of passenger milage to be driver operated by 2020. Nobody knows however what percentage is in the franchise agreement as the actual figure is withheld for commercial reasons. I suspect it is higher because if it was 50% this figure is publicly known so it seems pointless hiding it.

Whilst Accrington and other places have tight curves surely having cameras on the side of the train eliminates this problem. They are not reliant on mirrors. There are several tube stations with tight curves and this doesn't prevent driver dispatch.

 

[muz379]

While bidders had to deliver new self-powered trains it was not a requirement to put the new trains on Northern Connect routes. Refurbished 158s, 170s and 365s could have been used for Northern Connect services while a brand new DMU order could have been used for diesel commuter routes around cities like Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds and Sheffield (similar to the LM franchise.) It was also not a requirement to introduce as many Northern Connect routes as Arriva plan to - only the ex-TPE routes had to become 'Northern Connect' standard, the rest would have given Arriva extra quality points which might have resulted in them winning the franchise ahead of another bidder like Govia.

I am well aware of all of this . But the path that Ariva has chosen to go down is to run that many northern connect services and use a brand new fleet soley for Northern connect services .

Personally that to me seems common sense .
To ensure that the units meet the standards required for northern connect and give the "higher quality" feel they want for these services it seems obvious to use brand new trains built for purpose , not only that but any new build train was always going to be built to allow DOO
Operationally these commuter routes you speak of have many shortcomings in their infrastructure which would make DOO difficult if not impossible to implement in the timeline specified in the franchise hence meaning any brand new train used on these routes would be wasted .

DCO was never going to be introduced first on the many commuter routes it would need to be to meet the 50% of mileage requirement . Because not enough of those routes are ready for it . And the plethora and seemingly random allocation of rolling stock on those routes is too inconsistent .Id argue there is not enough slack to allow currently in service units to have DOO equipment fitted they are struggling as it is with shortages with the small number of units released to get the first stages of minor refurbishments carried out . Taking them out of service for even more extensive work like DOO equipment would make things even harder . Not to mention that is there even approved equipment for the vast majority of stock that currently is and will continue to be used on commuter routes ?

Installing DOO equipment on units that are currently in service would have then probably forced ASLEF to at least think about the issue . Drivers would then be driving refurbished units with the DOO equipment in place albeit not being expected to use it . That raises a plethora of issues around what would happen to a driver if they accidentally closed the doors and trapped someone etc etc .

Using new built units means that the issue of DOO equipment in cabs does not have to be addressed until the training is put together for drivers who will be signing the new units .

Indeed.....and in some places like Accrington, that will be impossible unless the railway was radically re engineered.

Indeed that is one example of a place whereby radical re engineering would be required . I can think of a few more . But these places are certainly in their minority and are places risk assessments may well state that dispatchers and RA indicators may be required although bodyside CCTV would negate the curve anyway (not that I think this is as safe as mk1 eyeballs ) .

Unless the number of locations that dispatch staff are newly required means the number of new dispatchers is higher than the number of displaced guards supposedly the long term reduction in operating costs will be met .

I suspect however that the increase in delay minutes because of a lack of guard on the platform at busy times resolving issues , speeding up boarding etc etc may well mean that the increase in delay minutes eats into or eliminates any reduction in operating costs . And certainly makes the implementation of the on time railway to the minute look increasingly impossible .

 

[northwichcat]

I suspect it is higher because if it was 50% this figure is publicly known so it seems pointless hiding it.

Or it might simply be hidden because the government and operator think it will affect negotiations with the union. If the RMT get Northern to commit to 60% of services having a guard dispatching the train, the RMT won't know if they've negotiated a change to the franchise agreement or not.

 

[HowardGWR]

Just an anecdote about our trip from Leeds to Skipton last Monday (10th July) at 1626. As far as I could see, the electrics were operating normally (looking at RTT) and no sight of 'management' guards (but what do I know?).

Does anyone know how unionised the staff are on this route? It didn't see as though there was much support for the RMT strike.

 

[northernchris]

Just an anecdote about our trip from Leeds to Skipton last Monday (10th July) at 1626. As far as I could see, the electrics were operating normally (looking at RTT) and no sight of 'management' guards (but what do I know?).

Does anyone know how unionised the staff are on this route? It didn't see as though there was much support for the RMT strike.

The Airedale/Wharfedale lines still had a reasonable service on the strike days, probably helped by the fact that both Leeds and Skipton are both traincrew depots so have a decent amount of managers available to step in. Certainly the Bradford services I used had a manager guard as no revenue checks were taking place

 

[bradford758]

Just an anecdote about our trip from Leeds to Skipton last Monday (10th July) at 1626. As far as I could see, the electrics were operating normally (looking at RTT) and no sight of 'management' guards (but what do I know?).

Does anyone know how unionised the staff are on this route? It didn't see as though there was much support for the RMT strike.

The Leeds - Ilkley/Skipton electrics were on a half-hourly service 7 am to 7 pm (i.e. not the peak extras) so you wouldn't probably notice any difference.
The North Bradford Electrics however were very reduced.