Arriva Rail North DOO

[Andyh82]

I wonder what the chances of a strike on Sunday 10th September are? It's the Great North Run that Sunday

In the great scheme of things I would say the North East relies on Northern much less than any other part of the North, the main flow up the ECML isn't Northern, and urban trips involve the T&W Metro.


Due to the fairly decent skeleton service Northern provide during the day these days, I bet they will do more Fridays, as the lack of any evening service at all will hit more people.

 

[northernchris]

If Northern's response on their website is correct about the guaranteeing jobs and pay for the duration of the franchise then I don't see why there is a need for a strike? Unless of course Northern aren't telling the truth. Either way it would be wrong for this to run indefinitely as no-one will benefit from this

 

[Andyh82]

If Northern's response on their website is correct about the guaranteeing jobs and pay for the duration of the franchise then I don't see why there is a need for a strike? Unless of course Northern aren't telling the truth. Either way it would be wrong for this to run indefinitely as no-one will benefit from this

The RMT will want reassurances beyond the end of this franchise, which of course nobody can give them.

As has been pointed out before, there is no way out of this strike action, they are in deadlock, unless the government allow Northern to forget about DCO.

 

[Carlisle]

As has been pointed out before, there is no way out of this strike action, they are in deadlock, unless the government allow Northern to forget about DCO.

I suppose it also hinges on how ASLEF deal with these issues whenever negotiations start properly with northern and Merseyrail and what agreement Southern eventually reach.

 

[kw12]

I suppose it also hinges on how ASLEF deal with these issues whenever negotiations start properly with northern and Merseyrail and what agreement Southern eventually reach.

In which case what is the point in holding strikes before either of these occur?

 

[Carlisle]

In which case what is the point in holding strikes before either of these occur?

The union will claim this type of strike action has proven to be pretty effective, with both GWR and Scotrail scrapping DOO expansion in the last couple of years largely as a result a similar strategy.

 

[185]

If Northern's response on their website is correct about the guaranteeing jobs and pay for the duration of the franchise then I don't see why there is a need for a strike?

Their concrete DOO "Guarantee" would by slowly altered / forgotten about, as has happened at other TOCs. The legislation is removed that requires Person 2 on the train, giving the company an option in "some really rare, unusual (lol) circumstances" to only run with a driver.

This will initially be:
(1) Guard late
(2) Guard sick
(3) Incoming train late
etc... all rather reasonable.

Then after all this is forgotten about this would probably extend to:
(4) We didn't hire enough staff
(5) We're not paying overtime
(6) Dog ate homework
etc... opens the floodgates

 

[northwichcat]

Their concrete DOO "Guarantee" would by slowly altered / forgotten about, as has happened at other TOCs. The legislation is removed that requires Person 2 on the train, giving the company an option in "some really rare, unusual (lol) circumstances" to only run with a driver.

This will initially be:
(1) Guard late
(2) Guard sick
(3) Incoming train late
etc... all rather reasonable.

Then after all this is forgotten about this would probably extend to:
(4) We didn't hire enough staff
(5) We're not paying overtime
(6) Dog ate homework
etc... opens the floodgates

But then it's not Northern who need to come up with a solution, it's DfT and Rail North who need to make sure there are stiff penalties for not hiring enough staff and ensure those penalties remain included in the contract for the next franchise.

 

[kw12]

Their concrete DOO "Guarantee" would by slowly altered / forgotten about, as has happened at other TOCs. The legislation is removed that requires Person 2 on the train, giving the company an option in "some really rare, unusual (lol) circumstances" to only run with a driver.

There is no "DOO Guarantee" and nor is there any legislation that "requires Person 2 on the train".

Northern has stated that it is prepared to "guarantee jobs and current pay for all our conductors". That is not the same as giving a guarantee that, for example, all trains will have a second member of staff apart from in exceptional circumstances.

 

[Moonshot]

There is no "DOO Guarantee" and nor is there any legislation that "requires Person 2 on the train".

Northern has stated that it is prepared to "guarantee jobs and current pay for all our conductors". That is not the same as giving a guarantee that, for example, all trains will have a second member of staff apart from in exceptional circumstances.

This is correct .....and guards are slowly waking up to the fact that there is no need to tow the Union line.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

Well I hope that the Guards read the company briefings very closely, before choosing to abandon the Union line. I think they need to keep a close eye on what is going on. My personal opinion (as a non-Guard) is that they need to stick with the union on this one.

 

[8J]

The guards and drivers really need to stick together with this. The DCO plans for Northern and Merseyrail have been in the pipeline for a long time. The appointment of Councillor Liam Robinson (an advocate of one person operation) as the chair of Merseytravel in suspicious circumstances (surrounding the false claims of expenses fiddling by then chair Mark Dowd) and then Cllr Robinson has become chair of Rail North. All sounds a bit like he's been put in this position by people upstairs to do the job of pushing DOO in.

The answer to this dispute is a political one but not one I see forthcoming any time soon so the strikes will continue...

 

[Carlisle]

The answer to this dispute is a political one but not one I see forthcoming any time soon so the strikes will continue...

What actual political settlement do you envisage, constructive negotiations and concessions on both sides or do you expect a politician eventually to simply agree to concede to virtually all of the unions demands merely to end the dispute.

 

[Robertj21a]

The guards and drivers really need to stick together with this. The DCO plans for Northern and Merseyrail have been in the pipeline for a long time. The appointment of Councillor Liam Robinson (an advocate of one person operation) as the chair of Merseytravel in suspicious circumstances (surrounding the false claims of expenses fiddling by then chair Mark Dowd) and then Cllr Robinson has become chair of Rail North. All sounds a bit like he's been put in this position by people upstairs to do the job of pushing DOO in.

The answer to this dispute is a political one but not one I see forthcoming any time soon so the strikes will continue...

Only a personal view but I reckon that no amount of strikes will stop this going ahead.

 

[Moonshot]

Only a personal view but I reckon that no amount of strikes will stop this going ahead.

Which is my view as well......

No one is actually losing their jobs.

 

[HowardGWR]

Only a personal view but I reckon that no amount of strikes will stop this going ahead.

Your comment could appear (and I think perhaps has) on any of the three or four local threads we have running on this issue. I am not knocking that, but I have wondered whether we should have one thread on the general issue and the rest for the individual issues and developments in each area.

As I see it, the only local component of the issue is whether the provided technology for any station or line is adequate, plus redundancy / job description change issues on any TOC.

We've had the RSSB report which has been accepted by Government, so there really is no point in arguing the toss about that on any particular TOC dispute.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

Which is my view as well......

No one is actually losing their jobs.

If no-one was losing their job the Union would have nothing to strike about and this would all be a non-story. The Guards might get to keep a job, but that's not necessarily the same thing. It's a bit like how Southern Guards were guaranteed a job, but the job wasn't that of a Guard.

 

[313103]

No one is actually losing their jobs.

So if say (as i dont have the full figures) 100 Guards posts are being lost and if what you say is true the company have said there will be 100 other posts available with no loss of earnings and current terms and conditions are protected?

Or am i reading you wrong and jumping to conclusions?

My experience of going through a DOO scheme may or may not be the same as what the current Guards will/are going through, however i have to laugh when they say no one is losing there jobs. They said the same on the former company i was employed by, 138 Guards to be precise but not all of them kept a job (i know its not a job creation scheme before anyone starts) i would say about 60 actually left. No doubt the same tactics will be used in Arriva Trains North as was in my last company to reduce numbers.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

I would suggest that the ideal solution from the RMT pov would be for Northern to write the safety cases for the new trains in such a way as to absolutely require the provision of a safety critical guard on every service regardless of who presses the door master control buttons. This would effectively do what Northern (and others) say can't (or won't) be done, namely to guarantee the continued presence of safety critical guards on all trains as an ongoing practice beyond the limited timescale of this or any other franchise.

The danger which Moonshot and others seem happy to ignore is that introducing DOO primarily on Connect services, whose nature makes the presence of some onboard staff desirable in any case, is a Trojan horse; when the 319s need replacing, very likely to be necessary during the next franchise, the new units would also come equipped as pure DOO trains but since they (will) generally operate on purely local services the DfT would push, Southern style, for the elimination of guards but with only a minimal mobile revenue squad to provide an onboard presence since the subsidy profile of Northern "demands" that the DfT seeks cuts in costs. And of course such action would then be applied to those 331-operated services which are not branded as Connect. It's all very well saying that Northern are offering all that they are able to but of course at this point Northern have zero interest in what might happen in a future franchise. RMT on the other hand have every reason to have such an interest. The fact that Moonshot doesn't share this view is either a case of "I'm all right Jack" or that possibly they don't much care for the safety critical aspects of the guard's role and would rather spend all their time interacting with passengers.

Whether such views are more widely held among the broader membership will decide whether or not the strikes continue but my own suspicion is that Moonshot is part of a minority, assuming they are even a member of RMT in the first place!

 

[the sniper]

No one is actually losing their jobs.

So long as you're willing to accept your fate in the OBS grade when it comes and respect any deterioration of the role while it lasts, fair enough.

 

[Steve Bray]

I was planning (and still am) to be in Leeds on 4th September in order to travel on a number of lines in West Yorkshire that I've not travelled on before. So I am curious to know what had been the impact of previous strikes? Was it solid, or did a number of trains run, and did some routes have no trains at all? I was planning to travel to Ilkley / Keighley / Barnsley and also Huddersfield to Denby Dale.

 

[northwichcat]

I was planning (and still am) to be in Leeds on 4th September in order to travel on a number of lines in West Yorkshire that I've not travelled on before. So I am curious to know what had been the impact of previous strikes? Was it solid, or did a number of trains run, and did some routes have no trains at all? I was planning to travel to Ilkley / Keighley / Barnsley and also Huddersfield to Denby Dale.

The strike timetables have changed between previous strikes so there's no guarantee they'll be the same next time as they've been the previous time. I would expect reduced services to Ilkley / Keighley / Barnsley from Leeds and possibly a replacement bus service from Huddersfield to Denby Dale.

 

[Moonshot]

So long as you're willing to accept your fate in the OBS grade when it comes and respect any deterioration of the role while it lasts, fair enough.

I tend to take an objective view - and as it stands there is a significant increase in the number of services in this franchise, 50% of which require a traditional guards role. Clearly this is going to take some time to achieve. Company have already stated no one is losing there jobs and pay structure will stay the same.

An alternative to strike action would be a ban on rest day working......that way everyone gets basic salary, but there will be service cancellations every day especially Sundays. No need for picket lines etc ....

 

[Moonshot]

So if say (as i dont have the full figures) 100 Guards posts are being lost and if what you say is true the company have said there will be 100 other posts available with no loss of earnings and current terms and conditions are protected?

Or am i reading you wrong and jumping to conclusions?

My experience of going through a DOO scheme may or may not be the same as what the current Guards will/are going through, however i have to laugh when they say no one is losing there jobs. They said the same on the former company i was employed by, 138 Guards to be precise but not all of them kept a job (i know its not a job creation scheme before anyone starts) i would say about 60 actually left. No doubt the same tactics will be used in Arriva Trains North as was in my last company to reduce numbers.

I do know some of the old timers would be glad to get out of the role with a VS package.....and fair play to them as far as I am concerned.

 

[CaptainHaddock]

I was planning (and still am) to be in Leeds on 4th September in order to travel on a number of lines in West Yorkshire that I've not travelled on before. So I am curious to know what had been the impact of previous strikes? Was it solid, or did a number of trains run, and did some routes have no trains at all? I was planning to travel to Ilkley / Keighley / Barnsley and also Huddersfield to Denby Dale.

Based on the strike days back in July I'd expect Leeds-Barnsley to be an hourly fast train only and Huddersfield-Denby Dale to be an all stops hourly or even a replacement bus. Services will probably only run between 0800 and 1800 as well, so not really the best day to go railrovering if you can help it.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

I tend to take an objective view - and as it stands there is a significant increase in the number of services in this franchise, 50% of which require a traditional guards role. Clearly this is going to take some time to achieve. Company have already stated no one is losing there jobs and pay structure will stay the same....

Reading back through the various briefings Northern staff have had, the following appears to be the company's line of thinking.

Guards will be able to retain employment by Northern.
The second person will concentrate on revenue and customer service.
Not every train will have a second person.
There is a vision to have revenue duties done at stations rather than on the train.
The company "cannot" agree to a Scotrail type deal.
The company will guarantee basic pay and required overtime payments.
The company cannot guarantee any other payments, including voluntary overtime (and probably commission from sales).
The company cannot guarantee current competency levels.
Future new entrants in the same grade may have different T&Cs and pay.

....An alternative to strike action would be a ban on rest day working......that way everyone gets basic salary, but there will be service cancellations every day especially Sundays. No need for picket lines etc ....

Given that Northern aren't even meeting their revenue targets now, I'm not sure how much of an effect that will actually have. As for Sundays, I believe there are some agreements for cross-cover and one half of the company are required to do a certain number of Sundays anyway. Also, an overtime ban has a knock on effect for annual leave. I believe that, beyond a certain number of staff, leave for train crew can only be granted if there is sufficient cover, no overtime means no cover. I'm sure there are other considerations too.

 

[northwichcat]

Reading back through the various briefings Northern staff have had, the following appears to be the company's line of thinking.

Guards will be able to retain employment by Northern.
The second person will concentrate on revenue and customer service.
Not every train will have a second person.
There is a vision to have revenue duties done at stations rather than on the train.
The company "cannot" agree to a Scotrail type deal.
The company will guarantee basic pay and required overtime payments.
The company cannot guarantee any other payments, including voluntary overtime (and probably commission from sales).
The company cannot guarantee current competency levels.
Future new entrants in the same grade may have different T&Cs and pay.

The third point needs clarification. If it's a case of trains could have just a driver on board then even if there's no staff shortage then the RMT could claim Northern plan to break the franchise agreement. Although, conversely agreeing to a Scotrail type deal would also be a breach of the franchise agreement.

If I was a guard I want to know more about the second to last point. It'd be one thing working 60% of services as a guard and 40% as a 'second member of staff', it would be another thing working 100% of services as a 'second member of staff.' For clarification I mean some trained guards no longer working as guards, not Northern moving to 100% DCO.

 

[Anvil1984]

The third point needs clarification. If it's a case of trains could have just a driver on board then even if there's no staff shortage then the RMT could claim Northern plan to break the franchise agreement. Although, conversely agreeing to a Scotrail type deal would also be a breach of the franchise agreement.

If I was a guard I want to know more about the second to last point. It'd be one thing working 60% of services as a guard and 40% as a 'second member of staff', it would be another thing working 100% of services as a 'second member of staff.' For clarification I mean some trained guards no longer working as guards, not Northern moving to 100% DCO.

From an internal staff release after the last talks broke down

We want to agree to a second person on many trains, just not all, as we want to explore staffing options, with RMT, where there may not be a need for a second person on-board.
We might decide, through talking, that we can improve upon our current levels of customer service, revenue protection and accessibility by staffing stations rather than trains on some routes and at some locations

Basically reading between the lines, Northern are wanting to run trains with one member of staff on some lines of route.

 

[Moonshot]

Reading back through the various briefings Northern staff have had, the following appears to be the company's line of thinking.

Guards will be able to retain employment by Northern.
The second person will concentrate on revenue and customer service.
Not every train will have a second person.
There is a vision to have revenue duties done at stations rather than on the train.
The company "cannot" agree to a Scotrail type deal.
The company will guarantee basic pay and required overtime payments.
The company cannot guarantee any other payments, including voluntary overtime (and probably commission from sales).
The company cannot guarantee current competency levels.
Future new entrants in the same grade may have different T&Cs and pay.



Given that Northern aren't even meeting their revenue targets now, I'm not sure how much of an effect that will actually have. As for Sundays, I believe there are some agreements for cross-cover and one half of the company are required to do a certain number of Sundays anyway. Also, an overtime ban has a knock on effect for annual leave. I believe that, beyond a certain number of staff, leave for train crew can only be granted if there is sufficient cover, no overtime means no cover. I'm sure there are other considerations too.

Indeed ......however overtime is voluntary and is a "weapon" that the RMT have advocated in ballots. There is a reliance on the goodwill of staff. Annual leave is mandated in contracts. I can safely say that at the coalface , there are increasing numbers who are wondering why we are bothering losing pay for strike action when there is no clear roadmap yet.

 

[Moonshot]

From an internal staff release after the last talks broke down



Basically reading between the lines, Northern are wanting to run trains with one member of staff on some lines of route.

And probably 2 where there are difficulties with fare evasion. Releasing guards from door duties does enhance that....I ve lost count of the amount of fares I couldnt collect because of that.