Arriva Rail North DOO

[northwichcat]

Except those that remember the strikes being called immediately after it, even against the advice of some prominent left wing politicians

1. The campaign of strike action started long before the timetable fiasco.
2. RMT cut itself adrift of mainstream political parties a long time ago and evidently see no benefit in reversing that.

Most passengers have long since given up caring about the roots of the dispute, they just want it resolved above all else.

Andy Burnham and Steve Rotheram said they don't support long distance services not having guards and asked for the RMT to call off strikes saying the passengers had suffered enough and said if they did that they would work with the RMT to resolve the dispute. The RMT's response was

RMT General Secretary Mick Cash said:

“Clearly this is a significant intervention from Andy Burnham and Steve Rotheram and shows that RMT’s campaign to keep a guard on Northern Rail trains is pulling in growing and powerful levels of political support. That is a tribute to RMT members who have not flinched in the fight for safety and accessibility on Northern trains for well over a year now. It comes after the Labour leadership gave unequivocal statements in support of RMT’s guard guarantee campaign.

"RMT is angry and frustrated that while we are making some progress in discussions in similar safety disputes‎ Arriva Rail North refuse point blank to engage with the union in any meaningful fashion. The ball is firmly in their court when it comes to progressing this dispute and it is down to the company to respond positively now and give me something of substance I can take back to RMT’s executive with a view to moving forwards.

“RMT stands ready for genuine and meaningful talks around the guarantee of a second safety-critical member of staff on their trains with Arriva Rail North any time, any place, anywhere. RMT has shown that we are deadly serious about negotiations in the other guards’ safety disputes and the same principle applies to ARN. With Andy Burnham’s and Steve Rotheram's intervention it is now down to Northern to pick up the phone and get the process moving.”

That doesn't sound like a union who sees itself as cut off from Labour but one that wants to believe Labour is fighting with them for the same purpose and ignores any information to the contrary.

They went on strike as originally planned, then two weeks after that

RMT confirms further strike action on Northern Rail in fight over guards and rail safety.

RAIL UNION RMT confirmed today that further strike action will take place two weeks Saturday on Arriva Rail North over attacks on the role of the safety-critical guard and the extension of Driver Only Operation in the name of increased profits. ‎

And they've striked on Saturdays ever since.

So 'significant' in Mick Cash's view is something you can ignore and stick two fingers up at. They don't want help resolving the dispute but are clearly unable to resolve it themselves.

 

[LOL The Irony]

Andy Burnham and Steve Rotheram said they don't support long distance services not having guards and asked for the RMT to call off strikes saying the passengers had suffered enough and said if they did that they would work with the RMT to resolve the dispute. The RMT's response was

Funny how mick ignores the fact that they asked for them to be called off.

 

[driver_m]

To post 8011 Are you party to what goes on in those meetings? No. But you're prepares to go straight onto the DfT side of things because of your inherent bias against the union. You don't know what is said in those meetings. Northern management could be useless, bound by DfT, whatever, but none of us know what's happening in these meetings. So instead of selectively pickings bits out to then use for damage quote the full thing if you can....

And before you throw something back at me, yes I used to be a member of the RMT, but I personally don't rate them as a Union, their PR efforts particularly. But on this one I'm with them all the way.

 

[Ken H]

However a decision to abolish those roles should be based primarily on the grounds of technological replacements being acceptable or superior for most users, not simply because their lack of ability to halt train services during disputes makes them easier to cull

no. it will be cutting costs. Its like banks. everyone says they want their local bank branch to stay open, but never use it, and do everything online. So everyone wants the ticket office but buy online or with a tvm.

 

[northwichcat]

Funny how mick ignores the fact that they asked for them to be called off.

Indeed. It was quite clearly an all or nothing invitation from Steve Rotheram and Andy Burnham (who are on the Rail North board so know EXACTLY what is going on) but they did the equivalent of a passenger ignoring the instruction to buy a ticket, travelling anyway and then being cocky enough to say Northern trains are good value for money when you don't pay for a ticket.

 

[northwichcat]

To post 8011 Are you party to what goes on in those meetings? No. But you're prepares to go straight onto the DfT side of things because of your inherent bias against the union. You don't know what is said in those meetings.

Would you say 38 days of strike action and not having got a resolution is a good result? If not you know something has to change and rejecting an offer from two influential politicians to help was stupid and idiotic. It's not about backing the DfT, it's about the RMT taking the approach George Osborne took with the economy. Mick Cash and the RMT leaders, like George Osborne, must realise the public think they're lunatics persisting with a plan A that won't work but also like George Osborne they are too pigheaded and arrogant to admit they got it wrong and to move to plan B. Also like the Tories weren't the people who suffered the most because of Osborne's failures, the guards aren't the ones who have suffered the most because of the RMT's failures - the guards still have their jobs and chose to lose pay to strike, those who rely on the train to get to work haven't been as lucky as the guards have.

 

[northwichcat]

no. it will be cutting costs. Its like banks. everyone says they want their local bank branch to stay open, but never use it, and do everything online. So everyone wants the ticket office but buy online or with a tvm.

My local Northern station has a ticket office staffed for 14 hours/day Mon-Sat and a shorter shift on Sundays plus a TVM. When the ticket office is open most people use it over the TVM to purchase tickets for immediate travel, unless there's a long queue. You do have to walk past the ticket office window to get to the TVM so perhaps people just buy tickets at whichever they come to first.

 

[Ken H]

My local Northern station has a ticket office staffed for 14 hours/day Mon-Sat and a shorter shift on Sundays plus a TVM. When the ticket office is open most people use it over the TVM to purchase tickets for immediate travel, unless there's a long queue. You do have to walk past the ticket office window to get to the TVM so perhaps people just buy tickets at whichever they come to first.

Same people who use queue to use manned supermarket checkouts rather than the self scanning ones. or who dont use pay at pump. But Asda have filling stations with no kiosk. its pay at pump or nothing and they are busy.

 

[ComUtoR]

its pay at pump or nothing and they are busy.

I used my first pay at pump (unstaffed petrol station) a few months ago. It was the only petrol station for miles. I didn't use it out of choice. I use Asda self scan but not the Tesco one. I have stopped using pay at pump at my local petrol station because of the new charging process. I often fill up and then go into the shop to purchase other items too. My preference is to get my cinema tickets at the cinema is because of the charges when buying them online.

Using modern technology and/or modern payment methods is a choice and people will do so for various reasons. That shouldn't mean you get rid of staff.

 

[yorksrob]

I used a ticket machine today (against my better judgement) and surprise surprise, it only printed out one direction of my return journey. Fortunately this was a London terminal, so there was assistance available, but I can understand why people avoid the machines !

 

[driver_m]

Would you say 38 days of strike action and not having got a resolution is a good result? If not you know something has to change and rejecting an offer from two influential politicians to help was stupid and idiotic. It's not about backing the DfT, it's about the RMT taking the approach George Osborne took with the economy. Mick Cash and the RMT leaders, like George Osborne, must realise the public think they're lunatics persisting with a plan A that won't work but also like George Osborne they are too pigheaded and arrogant to admit they got it wrong and to move to plan B. Also like the Tories weren't the people who suffered the most because of Osborne's failures, the guards aren't the ones who have suffered the most because of the RMT's failures - the guards still have their jobs and chose to lose pay to strike, those who rely on the train to get to work haven't been as lucky as the guards have.

You didn't answer my question did you? Were you party to those meetings? Don't turn it round to me.... That's your classic response. Answer the question.

 

[sandyravage]

Talks are scheduled tomorrow. Having spoke with one of the RMT negotiators I wouldn't hold out much hope of the talks lasting beyond dinner.

 

[Carlisle]

You don't know what is said in those meetings. Northern management could be useless, bound by DfT,

Your profession has done extremely well out of the current franchising model, and I doubt almost anyone has a problem with that given rail is now very safe and most staff extremely professional, however under the present system the DFT is tasked with seeing the bigger picture and specifying changes accordingly, otherwise it would have to be be full privatisation or nationalisation and do you seriously think you’d have actually been better off under either of those?

 

[PR1Berske]

Talks are scheduled tomorrow. Having spoke with one of the RMT negotiators I wouldn't hold out much hope of the talks lasting beyond dinner.

Is that because the RMT has moved the goalposts again, as has been suggested by earlier posts?

 

[Bantamzen]

To post 8011 Are you party to what goes on in those meetings? No. But you're prepares to go straight onto the DfT side of things because of your inherent bias against the union. You don't know what is said in those meetings. Northern management could be useless, bound by DfT, whatever, but none of us know what's happening in these meetings. So instead of selectively pickings bits out to then use for damage quote the full thing if you can....

And before you throw something back at me, yes I used to be a member of the RMT, but I personally don't rate them as a Union, their PR efforts particularly. But on this one I'm with them all the way.

Another possibility exists, that the RMT have simply painted themselves into an ideological corner. Its not unknown for unions to become so focused on what they want that they miss opportunities to actually broker a position in which to achieve it. In this case Northern have offered to revisit the key sticking point, TfN have effectively put their weight behind the having two crew members vers on all services, and now Labour are offering to get to a resolution. But so far the one caveat asked of the RMT to kickstart some movement has thus far not been agreed to.

I've said it before, but it is important to reiterate, the public support for the dispute is waining fast. This will be political gold for the government, not just in their dispute with the RMT but will all unions. Mick Cash and the top table at RMT need to consider their position very carefully, a continuing dispute at this time of year is hurting people it needs politically to back them.

 

[sandyravage]

The RMT position is clear. 3 items to be agreed as has ways been the case. If they negotiate anything less than that they have lost, they may lose anyway but then they know that already.

 

[northwichcat]

You didn't answer my question did you? Were you party to those meetings? Don't turn it round to me.... That's your classic response. Answer the question.

The RMT have reported their accounts of what happened at meetings along with their usual slagging off of Northern so yes we all know why the RMT think their talks haven't been successful - they want Northern to give in to their 3 demands and Northern haven't done. The only thing we don't know is how close to the RMT's demands Northern's offers have been.

You previously said you were ignoring my posts and you wouldn't respond to mine if I didn't respond to yours. However, given your unwarranted outburst in direct response to my post which which mainly reposting original content from the RMT I couldn't ignore it.

 

[northwichcat]

The RMT position is clear. 3 items to be agreed as has ways been the case. If they negotiate anything less than that they have lost, they may lose anyway but then they know that already.

Surely compromising and getting something approaching all 3 is better than losing and getting nothing, possibly even losing the guarantee of guards remaining on the guard grade if they refuse to agree anything with Northern.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The RMT position is clear. 3 items to be agreed as has ways been the case. If they negotiate anything less than that they have lost, they may lose anyway but then they know that already.

That isn't "negotiation", that is setting out demands. If that's what the RMT is going to do, Northern shouldn't even let them in.

Negotiation will require both sides to make concessions to "meet in the middle" to a resolution. An example of a sensible compromise resolution might be OBS working with the OBS mandatory or the train is cancelled, and with the OBS having a certain level of safety training e.g. in relation to evacuation of the train.

 

[sandyravage]

The RMT don't care what a second person is called but they must be on all trains, safety critical and have a role in the dispatch process. This is the policy set by members at conference, the feeling in the depots is that anything less than that is unacceptable. It all boils down to what the members of the RMT at ARN want at the end of the day.

 

[sandyravage]

The RMT don't care what a second person is called but they must be on all trains, safety critical and have a role in the dispatch process. This is the policy set by members at conference, the feeling in the depots is that anything less than that is unacceptable. It all boils down to what the members of the RMT at ARN want at the end of the day.

I should clarify "from an RMT point if view" obviously the company want something completely different.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The RMT don't care what a second person is called but they must be on all trains, safety critical and have a role in the dispatch process. This is the policy set by members at conference, the feeling in the depots is that anything less than that is unacceptable. It all boils down to what the members of the RMT at ARN want at the end of the day.

It doesn't. It boils down to a compromise, which means that both sides will have to give up one or more of their demands.

As I said, my suggestion would be that the most sensible things to give up would be ARN/DfT giving up the idea of single-manned trains and the RMT giving up dispatch.

 

[sandyravage]

From what I understand, compromise isn't on the table from either side. The RMT aren't willing to give up dispatch and the company still want the ability to run trains without a second person.

 

[Bletchleyite]

From what I understand, compromise isn't on the table from either side. The RMT aren't willing to give up dispatch and the company still want the ability to run trains without a second person.

Then there is no point anyone even bothering to attend. They might as well have the free tea and sandwiches to take away for eating in their offices / on the picket line.

Without compromise (which to me will involve each party giving up those two things) this will continue until the end of the franchise.

 

[scrapy]

When people are suggesting compromises, it has been the government / dft / Arriva that have been trying to change the status quo (a guard on every train, safety critical and in charge of dispatch), so any movement from the RMT would be compromise this may not happen until the last minute.

Are people seriously suggesting that any proposal whether or not they agree with it a union should meet half way? What about if the RMT went to Northern and said we want a £10,000 pay rise, 10 extra annual leave days and a 30 hour working week for guards that the company should compromise and meet the union halfway? Of course not.

Yet when it comes to a union compromising they are all for it, even though it's likely that if DCO is introduced passengers will see little if any benefit from a customer service or punctuality, no increase in safety (and depending on your views possibly less safe trains) and passengers certainly won't see fare decreases.

 

[northwichcat]

In response to @scrapy the company can go halfway with your proposal but not in the way the union would want e.g. £5k pay increase but over the next few years not all at once and a holiday entitlement increase but only for those who have done over 5 years continuous service. I'm sure the RMT would be outraged if they demanded a pay rise and a TOC's response was that their offer is £0 as it's not in their interests to increase the payroll bill and that's non-negotiable, which is equivalent to what the RMT are doing over DCO.

ASLEF met Southern part way - Southern would like to run trains without OBS' if they are on strike, ASLEF want to see the industrial action making an impact and on that ASLEF got their way even though Southern got their way over having no OBS under certain circumstances.

 

[driver_m]

As an aside. Now that Arriva want to do penalty fa

The RMT have reported their accounts of what happened at meetings along with their usual slagging off of Northern so yes we all know why the RMT think their talks haven't been successful - they want Northern to give in to their 3 demands and Northern haven't done. The only thing we don't know is how close to the RMT's demands Northern's offers have been.

You previously said you were ignoring my posts and you wouldn't respond to mine if I didn't respond to yours. However, given your unwarranted outburst in direct response to my post which which mainly reposting original content from the RMT I couldn't ignore it.

Still haven't answered my question. Where you at the meeting? I should really ignore your posts as they do my blood pressure no good. I vowed not to come back on this particular thread and I'm rather annoyed with myself for doing so. However, I think everyone else now can see that there are very few if any objective views on this thread and it should change its title to "why I think the guards are right/wrong to strike" .It would be more honest.

 

[driver_m]

Your profession has done extremely well out of the current franchising model, and I doubt almost anyone has a problem with that given rail is now very safe and most staff extremely professional, however under the present system the DFT is tasked with seeing the bigger picture and specifying changes accordingly, otherwise it would have to be be full privatisation or nationalisation and do you seriously think you’d have actually been better off under either of those?

You mistake me for someone who is ONLY bothered about their pay packet. No, I care deeply about the railway .I want to see it grow, thrive, stay safe, and be fully staffed. The DfT are not to be trusted at all. If we have to be privatised, then let an SRA style operation do it. Otherwise bring back either a sectorised BR or a big 4 style operation. Or some sort of co-op system

 

[sandyravage]

The company have just issued a statement via email to staff stating what they expect from talks while it's negotiating team are supposedly "negotiating", not exactly conducive to productive talks.

 

[Bantamzen]

The RMT position is clear. 3 items to be agreed as has ways been the case. If they negotiate anything less than that they have lost, they may lose anyway but then they know that already.

That isn't "negotiation", that is setting out demands. If that's what the RMT is going to do, Northern shouldn't even let them in.

Negotiation will require both sides to make concessions to "meet in the middle" to a resolution. An example of a sensible compromise resolution might be OBS working with the OBS mandatory or the train is cancelled, and with the OBS having a certain level of safety training e.g. in relation to evacuation of the train.

Exactly. Northern have said they are willing to discuss the issue further, the RMT have demanded Northern offer them everything before the negotiations. This is a tactic that heralds from the 1970s and has no place in modern dispute resolution.