ASLEF Overtime Ban at TPE Suspended

[Horizon22]

Correct, e.g. the idea of a "Sunday rota" of committed rest days.

There's 3 different ways* of "covering" Sundays, very basically:

• Outside working week: Everything is overtime dependent on who is available. Certain people can opt out completely. Rarer now, but exists
• "Committed" Sundays: Sundays are paid as overtime, but you are committed to work them as per your roster. If you want it off, you/rosters need to find cover. Some see it as the best or worst of both worlds depending on your outlook!
• Inside working week: Sunday is a usual day on the roster, just like Monday-Saturday

* Yes there are exceptions and quirks - see here - but this is a general concept.

 

[Bald Rick]

In that very unlikely scenario, trains would get cancelled. Pretty rare for that to happen in my experience. Last resort is a cover driver would get used on the day.

But it requires an overtime agreement, no?

 

[12LDA28C]

But it requires an overtime agreement, no?

If you mean the use of a cover driver no. If you mean using RDW to cover drivers taking leave on a booked Sunday then yes, of course.

 

[43066]

Remember that overtime suits everyone - the company and those doing it.

Yes, but the quid pro quo is that either party is equally free to stop participating in overtime should it suit them to do so, for any (or no) reason.

There’s a bit of a double standard here: If TOCs stopped giving drivers overtime people wouldn’t bat an eyelid - in fact many have said they would prefer that - but if ASLEF withdraw it (or even if lots of drivers simply decide to stop doing it, a la Avanti) ASLEF/drivers are then blamed for the service falling apart.

 

[ComUtoR]

There’s never a problem January - March, and always a problem in December / Summer. So do you have enough drivers to cover all requirements at the absolute peak, and have drivers sitting around doing nothing for the rest of the year, perhaps as many as 20% in the first three months of the year?

Wouldn't that make Jan-March the best time to do any operational training and route refreshers ? If a TOC decides to leave those spare Drivers sitting around doing nothing, thats their choice, and a poor one at that. That downtime could be utilised better.

 

[12LDA28C]

Wouldn't that make Jan-March the best time to do any operational training and route refreshers ? If a TOC decides to leave those spare Drivers sitting around doing nothing, thats their choice, and a poor one at that. That downtime could be utilised better.

Yes, however drivers don't conveniently fall out of competence on traction or route in the first three months of the year. It can happen at any time. Stuff like safety briefs and so on could be done when there are more spare drivers and this is exactly what happens at many locations.

 

[ComUtoR]

Yes, however drivers don't conveniently fall out of competence on traction or route in the first three months of the year. It can happen at any time.

Very true but you can have co-ordinated route learning done during those times where people are sat around. You shouldn't wait for competency to expire.

Stuff like safety briefs and so on could be done when there are more spare drivers and this is exactly what happens at many locations.

I know. Which is why I state that this Jan-March period needs to be used productively. If many TOCs are doing their safety briefs during this time then Drivers aren't 'sitting about'

 

[43066]

Wouldn't that make Jan-March the best time to do any operational training and route refreshers ? If a TOC decides to leave those spare Drivers sitting around doing nothing, thats their choice, and a poor one at that. That downtime could be utilised better.

I’d also respectfully query @Bald Rick ‘s suggestion there’s “never a problem Jan to March” at current staffing levels. It’s a little better now, but where I am has been very much on a wing and a prayer in terms of reliance on overtime for most of the last year, to the point where if you want it you’ll get it (and often be given a choice of turns!), and they’ll regularly ring around asking people if they’re willing to do extra!

Another point is that all of these factors: route refreshers, average absence levels, training etc. are known quantities, and it would be very easy to recruit enough drivers to run the service with less reliance on overtime. It’s a conscious choice to run at low levels.

I know. Which is why I state that this Jan-March period needs to be used productively. If many TOCs are doing their safety briefs during this time then Drivers aren't 'sitting about'

Albeit some briefs are seasonal, so need to be delivered close to the relevant time of year, some might result from resignalling schemes/track remodelling etc., so won’t all neatly slot into convenient parts of the calendar.

 

[Bald Rick]

If you mean using RDW to cover drivers taking leave on a booked Sunday then yes, of course.

yes I meant that.

Yes, but the quid pro quo is that either party is equally free to stop participating in overtime should it suit them to do so, for any (or no) reason.

of course

If TOCs stopped giving drivers overtime people wouldn’t bat an eyelid

depends who you mean b6 ‘people’. I suspect some drivers would very quickly be fluttering their eyelids!

I’d also respectfully query @Bald Rick ‘s suggestion there’s “never a problem Jan to March” at current staffing levels. It’s a little better now, but where I am has been very much on a wing and a prayer in terms of reliance on overtime for most of the last year, to the point where if you want it you’ll get it (and often be given a choice of turns!), and they’ll regularly ring around asking people if they’re willing to do extra!

Fair point - ‘never’ was too bold. However, delays and cancellations due to traincrew are always at their lowest Jan - March.

Another point is that all of these factors: route refreshers, average absence levels, training etc. are known quantities,

not necessarily. Absence isn’t always ‘average’ as many TOCs have found out this last few years. Training can vary considerably, and at short notice (see TPE).

 

[basfordlad]

What a turnaround
Only 9 such cancellations today......

 

[158801]

What a turnaround
Only 9 such cancellations today......

Some of those are down to a "police incident" yesterday

 

[Frankfurt]

What a turnaround
Only 9 such cancellations today......

Ammended timetable due to engineering works at Morley means fewer trains running, and fewer cancellations.

Rest day working will commence Sat 24th June.

 

[Bantamzen]

Yes, but the quid pro quo is that either party is equally free to stop participating in overtime should it suit them to do so, for any (or no) reason.

There’s a bit of a double standard here: If TOCs stopped giving drivers overtime people wouldn’t bat an eyelid - in fact many have said they would prefer that - but if ASLEF withdraw it (or even if lots of drivers simply decide to stop doing it, a la Avanti) ASLEF/drivers are then blamed for the service falling apart.

Is that really true though? Because this feels like one of the hardest things to believe of anything said on the debate about the industrial action. Drivers wouldn't bat an eyelid if they permanently lost the opportunities to earn additional wages amounting into thousands, maybe even tens of thousands a year? Two words. Yeah. Right. (I'd rather use just one here, but it would be against forum rules).

Don't get me wrong, I don't blame drivers (and indeed all staff) for taking overtime where they can and want to. I'd do the same, in fact in the past I have. But the current setup is a symbiotic one, the TOCs save some cash, drivers can make more. Nobody loses, well apart from during disputes. If ASLEF were so fundamentally against this situation, why has this not come to head a long time ago? It certainly sounds like its been an issue for years, perhaps decades so as an outsider I'm surprised to find that there hasn't been a more sustained campaign to stop the reliance on overtime. It could have been done simply though a permanent ban on overtime working for all members, yet it has only been deployed as part of a wider campaign. Why? Because it would be a very unpopular thing for the union to do. And again, I don't blame them for this, who in the union movement is going to tell their members that they are taking action against them earning some handy extra dosh?

Speaking purely as a passenger, I would have no problem if TOCs / DaFT were to allow additional budgets to ensure all areas of the railway were covered adequately and without the need for overtime as standard, especially if it meant trains ran when they are supposed to pretty much all the time. I'd even accept having to pay more for it, after all we punters seem to pay more regardless or performance. But considering the above, I'm really not expecting anything like this anytime soon. There are vested interests on both sides which will always prove problematic in having a "fully staffed" railway. All we can hope for is as what is perhaps happening at TPE, some cooler, calmer, more mature heads actually looking to find some middle ground to resolve the dispute before the railways really do rattle themselves apart.

 

[modernrail]

It does seem a bad way to run a business when it consistently relies so heavily on overtime. If it were just for seasonal variations or the odd market demand then fine but TPE seem to run on empty as Avanti did.

I think the heavy training requirement, so cost in time and money, for a driver is always going put a lot of higher management off training and development. We do have a culture in the UK of not training staff but poaching staff from else where. I saw it in IT where rather than training their own staff companies would eye up staff from other companies/industries. I noticed how many poaching calls I got once I had finished a course or two. That does not work so well with train drivers as people from non-rail industries don't have transferable skills of course.

Oh damn - now I have visions of you as an excitable child .

Another excuse for overtime is watching mortgage interest rates go up from stupidly low to very low !. In my day (1988-1989 iirc) they went from 8% - normal to 16% - high !.

Yes but house prices were much lower as a percentage of earnings. The net impact is much worse for many this time. I have friends in dire straits having come off fixes and the Government and BoE have allowed house prices to go crazy for years and now, adding in general and also UK only inflationary features, have allowed the setting of the ultimate mortgage trap. Those affected can also not move or even remortgage where they are - as they will often now fail affordability tests. It is really very serious, is not being take anywhere near seriously enough by those in power and those with paid off mortgages and it going to lead to anybody affected scrambling for pay rises/overtime etc.

 

[mandub]

Is that really true though? Because this feels like one of the hardest things to believe of anything said on the debate about the industrial action. Drivers wouldn't bat an eyelid if they permanently lost the opportunities to earn additional wages amounting into thousands, maybe even tens of thousands a year? Two words. Yeah. Right. (I'd rather use just one here, but it would be against forum rules).

Don't get me wrong, I don't blame drivers (and indeed all staff) for taking overtime where they can and want to. I'd do the same, in fact in the past I have. But the current setup is a symbiotic one, the TOCs save some cash, drivers can make more. Nobody loses, well apart from during disputes. If ASLEF were so fundamentally against this situation, why has this not come to head a long time ago? It certainly sounds like its been an issue for years, perhaps decades so as an outsider I'm surprised to find that there hasn't been a more sustained campaign to stop the reliance on overtime. It could have been done simply though a permanent ban on overtime working for all members, yet it has only been deployed as part of a wider campaign. Why? Because it would be a very unpopular thing for the union to do. And again, I don't blame them for this, who in the union movement is going to tell their members that they are taking action against them earning some handy extra dosh?

Speaking purely as a passenger, I would have no problem if TOCs / DaFT were to allow additional budgets to ensure all areas of the railway were covered adequately and without the need for overtime as standard, especially if it meant trains ran when they are supposed to pretty much all the time. I'd even accept having to pay more for it, after all we punters seem to pay more regardless or performance. But considering the above, I'm really not expecting anything like this anytime soon. There are vested interests on both sides which will always prove problematic in having a "fully staffed" railway. All we can hope for is as what is perhaps happening at TPE, some cooler, calmer, more mature heads actually looking to find some middle ground to resolve the dispute before the railways really do rattle themselves apart.

At Northern Rail we've had no rest day working for 2+ years now. Plenty of drivers moan about it of course but I don't know any that are too bothered. It's pretty much accepted.

I'm not sure about this but I thought..... that Aslef have a policy that all depots should be fully staffed and overtime should be for training purposes. I'm sure other posters will know more.

Northern also ran for years with no rest day working under Abellio at one point

 

[12LDA28C]

I'm not sure about this but I thought..... that Aslef have a policy that all depots should be fully staffed and overtime should be for training purposes. I'm sure other posters will know more.

That is ASLEF policy and has been mentioned in this thread. They are against RDW in principle and only agree it in certain circumstances.

 

[Peter Sarf]

Yes but house prices were much lower as a percentage of earnings. The net impact is much worse for many this time. I have friends in dire straits having come off fixes and the Government and BoE have allowed house prices to go crazy for years and now, adding in general and also UK only inflationary features, have allowed the setting of the ultimate mortgage trap. Those affected can also not move or even remortgage where they are - as they will often now fail affordability tests. It is really very serious, is not being take anywhere near seriously enough by those in power and those with paid off mortgages and it going to lead to anybody affected scrambling for pay rises/overtime etc.

Indeed in 1988-89 people were borrowing at 3 and then 3.5 times annual salary (but I am not sure a partners salary was counted) now it has been 4 or 5 times salary. With interest rates currently so alarmingly low there is a ticking time bomb. I remember "negative equity" in 1989 - people round me had borrowed more money than the house had become worth due to falling prices. I survived because I stuck to 3 times salary and did not buy anything (no furniture, no washing machine, donated cooker and abandoned my car) for about 6 years. But this time the mortgage repayments are going to more than double I fear and from a higher ratio of salary.

I thought the mis handling of the wind down of MIRAS in 1988 exacerbated things - it drove up for the part of the year when demand is already high. This time round help to buy schemes and stupidly low loan rates have pushed up demand where there is not supply !. As soon as demand falls away thee will be panic and a slide in prices. The fact that back in 1988 and this time round these factors could have been prevented or mitigated by government tells e how stupid politicians are. Or are they.....

ANY ONE WANTING TO REPLY TO THIS - perhaps quote it at the start of a new thread ?.

That is ASLEF policy and has been mentioned in this thread. They are against RDW in principle and only agree it in certain circumstances.

Yes. People should be able to by-and-large earn enough without having to rely on non-contractual hours. Overtime will always exist of course as some flexibility is inevitable.

Thinking out of the box the alternative is just to cancel some (some) trains when staff are not available ?. Its quality vs cost,

 

[12LDA28C]

Thinking out of the box the alternative is just to cancel some (some) trains when staff are not available ?. Its quality vs cost,

That's exactly what happens, there isn't really an alternative if there is no driver! Efforts to resource a driver would usually continue up until time of departure (where a RDW agreement is in place).

 

[43066]

Is that really true though? Because this feels like one of the hardest things to believe of anything said on the debate about the industrial action. Drivers wouldn't bat an eyelid if they permanently lost the opportunities to earn additional wages amounting into thousands, maybe even tens of thousands a year? Two words. Yeah. Right. (I'd rather use just one here, but it would be against forum rules).

Use as many words as you like - it’s there in black and white in the ASLEF charter. This is also how London Underground operates - no such thing as rest day work there:

ASLEF Charter | ASLEF

The ASLEF Charter underpins the union's industrial strategy and serves as the symbol that drives ASLEF towards establishing conditions of employment that provide the benchmark for best practice within the railway industry.

aslef.org.uk

• All free time off from duty to be rostered consecutively, to be guaranteed and mandatory by the elimination of institutionalised overtime.

TOCs, not ASLEF, decide how many drivers to employ and it’s entirely within the gift of TOCs to unilaterally decide to increase establishment levels to reduce or eliminate overtime. It might put some noses out of joint amongst those who do lots of it, but there would be nothing anybody could do, and it would be entirely in accordance with the union’s objectives.

Yet still somehow ASLEF gets the blame when its members “refuse” to work overtime and the service falls over .

Speaking purely as a passenger, I would have no problem if TOCs / DaFT were to allow additional budgets to ensure all areas of the railway were covered adequately and without the need for overtime as standard, especially if it meant trains ran when they are supposed to pretty much all the time. I'd even accept having to pay more for it,

So you (and many others) are fine with overtime being eliminated by the TOCs, despite the fact it would indeed cost some individuals tens of thousands per year. Yet ASLEF are criticised for calling overtime bans, specifically on the basis that it costs their members money. Hence the double standard I mentioned earlier!

 

[class397tpe]

What a turnaround
Only 9 such cancellations today......

No cancellations at all on south Transpennine! All running Liverpool - Cleethorpes as well.

 

[Bantamzen]

So you (and many others) are fine with overtime being eliminated by the TOCs, despite the fact it would indeed cost some individuals tens of thousands per year. Yet ASLEF are criticised for calling overtime bans, specifically on the basis that it costs their members money. Hence the double standard I mentioned earlier!

If the only way to sort out this mess is to staff the railways enough to eliminate the need for regular overtime, then frankly yes I am fine with it.

But please don't give me that double standards crap. Its your union that is against the current situation "in principle", but happily oversees it in reality. Like I said I have no problem with staff earning extra, so long as the trains actually run. I know if I had the opportunity to earn a fair bit more I would. But you can't coin it in one minute, then moan about it the next. It feels a bit like some want their have cake and to eat it.

 

[43066]

If the only way to sort out this mess is to staff the railways enough to eliminate the need for regular overtime, then frankly yes I am fine with it.

Well that clearly won’t happen. So the way to sort it out is to resolve the dispute.

But please don't give me that double standards crap. Its your union that is against the current situation "in principle", but happily oversees it in reality.

Not exactly a constructive response. Again showing you’re only interested in blaming ASLEF for this situation. Frankly the endless union bashing on here is getting a little tiresome.

The union is against RDW in principle, but agrees it when requested. ASLEF exists to represent its members and owes you absolutely nothing. However when the TOC happily takes your money, and then fails to employ enough staff to operate the service, you turn around and blame the union!

But you can't coin it in one minute, then moan about it the next. It feels a bit like some want their have cake and to eat it.

Who exactly is moaning here? It isn’t coming from the ASLEF side; they have demonstrated they are quite happy to withdraw rest day working when it suits them!

If I was a TPE passenger over the last year or so I’d direct my (justifiable) moaning towards the company I’ve made a contract with, rather than the union representing its workforce…

 

[Bantamzen]

@43066 Sorry fella, you lost me at your union bashing comment. If you can't see why a union fundamentally opposed to relying on overtime, yet sits by whilst it's members do it anyway until a dispute starts, then tries to weaponise it, is a problem. Well there's not a lot more to say.

 

[43066]

@43066 Sorry fella, you lost me at your union bashing comment. If you can't see why a union fundamentally opposed to relying on overtime, yet sits by whilst it's members do it anyway until a dispute starts, then tries to weaponise it, is a problem. Well there's not a lot more to say.

If it suits them and their members to do so, why on earth wouldn’t they? They’re only able to do so at all because of the decisions of the TOC!

If you can’t see why the TOC you make a contract with failing to employ enough staff to run the service is the problem, not the union, then agreed there is little more to say!

My local GP surgery is short staffed so I can’t get an appointment. I expect it’s the BMA’s fault.

 

[Bantamzen]

If it suits them and their members to do so, why on earth wouldn’t they?

I've already said twice, I don't blame them. I would do the same!

They’re only able to do so at all because of the decisions of the TOC!

But nonetheless under the watch of a union that claims to be fundamentally opposed to it, but sits by as it's members make hay. Have cake (union in principle is against reliance on overtime but does little about it save tutting), eat cake (members continue to work overtime when they wish as its a good way to earn some extra cash).

If you can’t see why the TOC you make a contract with failing to employ enough staff to run the service is the problem, not the union, then agreed there is little more to say!

And I did say that I would be more than happy for the TOCs to employ enough staff for overtime not to be an issue. But you seemed concerned by this...?

My local GP surgery is short staffed so I can’t get an appointment. I expect it’s the BMA’s fault.

I'm sorry, I'm not sure what your local GP has to do with this? Aren't they largely private companies contracted to run public services, a bit like the railways before the franchise model started to meltdown?

 

[Sly Old Fox]

You two are going to get yet another thread locked with your bickering.

 

[43066]

You two are going to get yet another thread locked with your bickering.

Fair point, we should probably stop, because it’s like two old women…

I’ll leave it there for that reason (although I’m right ).

 

[Bantamzen]

Fair point, we should probably stop, because it’s like two old women…

I’ll leave it there for that reason (although I’m right ).

Agreed....

(But oh no you're not!!)

 

[Mattydo]

Realistically how long does it take to get RDW up and running again. It's a tick sheet operation at our TOC then collected at the end of the week to produce rosters starting a week hence so that in itself would take a couple of weeks. That's obviously assuming there is any interest. How long has it been withdrawn for now?

 

[CAF397]

December 2021 RDW withdrawn. Earliest day for a RDW is Saturday 24th, to be rostered via the '48 hour' sheets. Any driver who wishes to be used for RDW to make themselves available for RDW.