LNER unreliability caused by staff shortages

[Bungle73]

I struck lucky. Both my services (Tuesday and today) ran ok. In fact the one I got this evening ran to time even though every other service on the line seemed to be massively delayed due to the disruption!

 

[Dave91131]

Happy Sunday to any poor soul unlucky enough to be travelling with LNER today:

0848 London to Edinburgh an hour late leaving London and losing more time as it heads north.
1003 London to Edinburgh cancelled throughout.
1103 London to Harrogate full and standing from London with first class declassified.
1133 London to Lincoln cancelled throughout.
1330 London to Edinburgh cancelled between London and Newcastle.
1630 London to Glasgow cancelled north of Newcastle.
1830 London to Edinburgh cancelled between London and Newcastle.
1930 London to Newcastle cancelled throughout.

0900 Edinburgh to London full and standing from Darlington.
0940 Inverness to London cancelled between Inverness and Edinburgh.
1200 Edinburgh to London cancelled between Edinburgh and Newcastle.
1400 Edinburgh to London cancelled between Newcastle and London.
1416 Newcastle to London cancelled throughout.
1420 Lincoln to London cancelled throughout.
1530 Edinburgh to London cancelled between Edinburgh and Newcastle.

Happy travelling - sorry; standing, crushing, bussing, complaining, delay repaying or all of the above.

 

[TUC]

This morning for Leeds-Kings Cross, the 0740 hd already been cancelled due to staff shortages. The following train, 0815, is starting short at Doncaster 'due to more trains than usual needing repairs at the same time.'.

Given that LNER already know that the 0740 was cancelled, it is frustrating that they did not rearrange train sets and crew to at least ensure that the next service from Leeds was not effectively cancelled as well.

 

[dk1]

This morning for Leeds-Kings Cross, the 0740 hd already been cancelled due to staff shortages. The following train, 0815, is starting short at Doncaster 'due to more trains than usual needing repairs at the same time.'.

Given that LNER already know that the 0740 was cancelled, it is frustrating that they did not rearrange train sets and crew to at least ensure that the next service from Leeds was not effectively cancelled as well.

But I suppose if working to rule, traincrew will refuse to come off roster so it was most likely not possible. Nobody is going to do anything to help out.

 

[TUC]

But I suppose if working to rule, traincrew will refuse to come off roster so it was most likely not possible. Nobody is going to do anything to help out.

It would be good for LNER to be explicit about that, if that is the case, and let the public respond as they choose. They are a publicly owned company so transparency is important.

 

[43066]

It would be good for LNER to be explicit about that, if that is the case, and let the public respond as they choose. They are a publicly owned company so transparency is important.

“Cancelled due to staff shortages” covers that perfectly well?

It isn’t as simple as just rearranging crews at the drop of a hat due to the need for breaks and impact on what’s happening for the rest of the their diagrams.

 

[DanNCL]

0740 from Leeds (0655 from Skipton) is a Mark 4 set, which will have influenced the decision making today.

Today's alterations from what I can see:
0933 Kings Cross - Harrogate cancelled
1003 Kings Cross - Leeds cancelled
1200 Kings Cross - Inverness terminating at Edinburgh
1400 Kings Cross - Aberdeen terminating at York
1530 Kings Cross - Glasgow terminating at Newcastle
1700 Kings Cross - Edinburgh terminating at Newcastle
1818 Kings Cross - Newcastle terminating at York
1903 Kings Cross - Leeds cancelled
2200 Kings Cross - Newcastle terminating at York
2300 Kings Cross - York terminating at Doncaster

0440 York - Kings Cross cancelled (set ran ECS as 5Y00)
0526 Stirling - Kings Cross started from Newcastle
0539 Sunderland - Kings Cross cancelled
0648 Glasgow - Kings Cross started from Newcastle
0655 Skipton - Kings Cross cancelled
0737 Harrogate - Kings Cross started from Doncaster
0900 Edinburgh - Kings Cross started from Newcastle
1336 Harrogate - Kings Cross cancelled

“Cancelled due to staff shortages” covers that perfectly well?

It isn’t as simple as just rearranging crews at the drop of a hat due to the need for breaks and impact on what’s happening for the rest of the their diagrams.

In this particular case it'll be down to the the crew and set for the second service being in Doncaster, with a set not signed by all crews being in Leeds for the first service that was cancelled throughout.

 

[43066]

In this particular case it'll be down to the the crew and set for the second service being in Doncaster, with a set not signed by all crews being in Leeds for the first service that was cancelled throughout.

Is this due to it being a 91? Thanks for that.

 

[Haywain]

Today's alterations from what I can see:
0933 Kings Cross - Harrogate cancelled
1003 Kings Cross - Leeds cancelled
1200 Kings Cross - Inverness terminating at Edinburgh
1400 Kings Cross - Aberdeen terminating at York
1530 Kings Cross - Glasgow terminating at Newcastle
1700 Kings Cross - Edinburgh terminating at Newcastle
1818 Kings Cross - Newcastle terminating at York
1903 Kings Cross - Leeds cancelled
2200 Kings Cross - Newcastle terminating at York
2300 Kings Cross - York terminating at Doncaster

Most of those are down to tomorrow's strike action.

 

[800001]

Most of those are down to tomorrow's strike action.

No they are not. Not a single of the cancellations/alterations today are to do with tomorrows strike.

 

[dk1]

It would be good for LNER to be explicit about that, if that is the case, and let the public respond as they choose. They are a publicly owned company so transparency is important.

No company will publicly announce the intricate details hence why just shortage of traincrew which it is.

 

[Haywain]

No they are not.

Yes, they are. The trains not serving destinations north of Edinburgh, or terminating short later in the day are doing so because of the strike.

 

[800001]

Yes, they are. The trains not serving destinations north of Edinburgh, or terminating short later in the day are doing so because of the strike.

As I said all of todays alteration are nothing to do with the strike.

Anything to do with tomorrow is preplanned and is scheduled in the timetable.

The list that @DanNCL has above is referring to today and amendments made today.

1W16 is planned into todays timetable yes due to strike tomorrow, but the substance of his post is based on , on the day amendments for today, which as I say have been made today with no reaction to tomorrows strike.

This is todays amendments over and above todays preplanned timetable, none are caused by tomorrows strike actions:-

Service Alterations:

Up Services

1Y14 0600 Berwick to Kings Cross start Morpeth (801203 ADD on 3Y14)

1A06 0640 Leeds to Kings Cross SSOs Retford, Grantham and Peterborough (vice 1A04)

1E03 0526 Stirling to Kings Cross terminate Edinburgh (OHL issues at Haymarket & Train Crew issues)

1E04 0656 Edinburgh to Kings Cross SSO Berwick (vice 1E03 OHL issues at Haymarket)

1A12 0700 Hull to Kings Cross start Doncaster crew shortage

1A15 0737 Harrogate to Kings Cross start Doncaster and SSOs Newark and Peterborough (vice 1A13)

1E06 0648 Glasgow to Kings Cross start Newcastle crew shortage

1E07 0830 Edinburgh to Kings Cross SSO Alnmouth (vice 1E06)

1E08 0900 Edinburgh to Kings Cross start Newcastle crew shortage

1A36 1445 Leeds to Kings Cross SSOs Grantham and Stevenage (vice 1A34)

1E23 1630 Edinburgh to Kings Cross SSO Durham, Northallerton, Doncaster, Newark & Peterborough (vice 1A22)

Down Services

1W11 1000 Kings Cross to Aberdeen SSO Peterborough, Newark, Doncaster, Northallerton & Durham (vice 1S12)

1D10 1033 Kings Cross to Leeds SSO Peterborough (vice 1D09)

1S23 1530 Kings Cross to Glasgow terminate Newcastle crew shortage

1W24 1600 Kings Cross to Aberdeen SSO Alnmouth (vice 1S23)

Cancelled Services:

Up Services

1Y00 0440 York to Kings Cross (801210 WSP fault at York)

1A04 0605 Leeds to Kings Cross crew shortage

1Y08 0540 Sunderland to Kings Cross (set imbalance)

1A13 0655 Skipton to Kings Cross crew shortage

1A26 1115 Leeds to Kings Cross (801210 WSP fault at York)

1A34 1336 Harrogate to Kings Cross crew shortage

1E22 1600 Edinburgh to Kings Cross (Train Crew Issues)

Down Services

1D06 0833 Kings Cross to Leeds (801210 WSP fault at York)

1S03 0856 Newcastle to Kings Cross (OHL issues at Haymarket)

1D08 0933 Kings Cross to Harrogate crew shortage

1D09 1003 Kings Cross to Leeds crew shortage

1S12 1030 Kings Cross to Edinburgh (Train Crew issues)

1D29 1903 Kings Cross to Leeds crew shortage

1D30 1933 Kings Cross to Leeds SSO Peterborough (vice 1D29)

Additional Services:

Up Services

1G03 0801 Newcastle to Kings Cross (In the path of 1E03 OHL issues at Haymarket)

 

[Haywain]

As I said all of todays alteration are nothing to do with the strike.

Anything to do with tomorrow is preplanned and is scheduled in the timetable.

The list that @DanNCL posted includes preplanned alterations.

 

[DanNCL]

The list that @DanNCL posted includes preplanned alterations.

Yes, I simply posted those that were altered compared to the WTT, as I didn’t have time to look into the specifics of each alteration.

 

[800001]

Yes, I simply posted those that were altered compared to the WTT, as I didn’t have time to look into the specifics of each alteration.

I’m not having ago, when I looked at it I thought it was aimed at todays on the day amendments.

 

[DanNCL]

23:00 Kings Cross - York now cancelled throughout instead of terminating at Doncaster.

There’s a cancellation to/from Lincoln now too but can’t remember which one(s)

I’m not having ago, when I looked at it I thought it was aimed at todays on the day amendments.

I didn’t think you were having a go I just wished to clarify my post

 

[NI 271]

It would be good for LNER to be explicit about that, if that is the case, and let the public respond as they choose.

Anyone without an axe to grind would find it perfectly normal for staff of any company, in any industry, to turn up for work and do that for which they are paid. Which is, after all, what "working to rule" means.

Of course, there are those who will demand others (but not themselves, of course) should just donate their own free time as if they aren't entitled to it. If, when staff are doing what they are paid to do, all work is not covered, it can't be the staff to blame, we've already established they're working to [company] rule, after all.

 

[43066]

Anyone without an axe to grind would find it perfectly normal for staff of any company, in any industry, to turn up for work and do that for which they are paid. Which is, after all, what "working to rule" means.

Of course, there are those who will demand others (but not themselves, of course) should just donate their own free time as if they aren't entitled to it. If, when staff are doing what they are paid to do, all work is not covered, it can't be the staff to blame, we've already established they're working to [company] rule, after all.

By

It would be good for LNER to be explicit about that, if that is the case, and let the public respond as they choose.

I wonder if that previous poster means that he thinks TOCs should be making explicit announcements to blame traincrew for trains not running, so putting all visible frontline staff at even more risk of abuse and assault than they normally face. That would be a pretty despicable viewpoint, so I imagine something else might have been intended.

Perhaps @TUC could clarify what he meant?

 

[NI 271]

If LNER were explicit, and said "staff are turning up and doing exactly what they are paid to do", which would be a factual statement, I suspect I know how the public would respond.

I'm sure this is what TUC means, he's surely not suggesting the company should misinform the public by suggesting people doing what they're contracted to are in some way letting the public down? I mean, that would be remarkably bizarre, and factually inaccurate, he'd not advocate that sort of dishonesty, would he?

 

[greyman42]

1Y00 0440 York to Kings Cross (801210 WSP fault at York)

This was the previous days 2205 from London to York which was 65 late at York. Was that due to the WSP fault and is this not usually a 91 set?

 

[DanNCL]

This was the previous days 2205 from London to York which was 65 late at York. Was that due to the WSP fault and is this not usually a 91 set?

It is usually a Mark 4 set but was worked by 801210 last night. Not sure if this was pre planned or an on the day swap.

 

[800001]

This was the previous days 2205 from London to York which was 65 late at York. Was that due to the WSP fault and is this not usually a 91 set?

It is normally a mk4 but was an Azuma last night, delayed on 1N36 due to a brake fault, not sure if connected to this mornings fault.

23:00 Kings Cross - York now cancelled throughout instead of terminating at Doncaster.

There’s a cancellation to/from Lincoln now too but can’t remember which one(s)


I didn’t think you were having a go I just wished to clarify my post

2300 reinstated and running to York.

 

[TUC]

“Cancelled due to staff shortages” covers that perfectly well?

It isn’t as simple as just rearranging crews at the drop of a hat due to the need for breaks and impact on what’s happening for the rest of the their diagrams.

I doesn't cover it well tbh if it is a staff absence that in non-dispute times would likely have been covered perfectly well.

I recognise that it is not always simple or possible, but swops of crews or trainsets are part of everyday business,

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Most trains are full leaving London, starting with the very first train.

Add in all these cancellations and amendments, well, I wouldn’t like to be attempting to travel on LNER.

Are LNER allowing travel on other services with advance tickets for trains turning up as 5 vice 9/10 cars?

 

[TUC]

If LNER were explicit, and said "staff are turning up and doing exactly what they are paid to do", which would be a factual statement, I suspect I know how the public would respond.

I'm sure this is what TUC means, he's surely not suggesting the company should misinform the public by suggesting people doing what they're contracted to are in some way letting the public down? I mean, that would be remarkably bizarre, and factually inaccurate, he'd not advocate that sort of dishonesty, would he?

If staff were being asked to work outside of their shift times for that day, that is clearly up to them whether to agree. However, if it is a change that would still keep the staff member within their shift hours and get them back to the same base at the end of their shift then that is surely just a kind of change that I or many others in multiple industries would consider to be one that an employer is perfectly entitled to make.

 

[The North Briton]

One customer who had an advance ticket from Darlington, was told on Twitter to stick to his booked service even though, at the time, it was running 105 late (1E03 from Stirling). Needless to say, he gave up and went home (hopefully with a fee-free refund!)

 

[dk1]

If staff were being asked to work outside of their shift times for that day, that is clearly up to them whether to agree. However, if it is a change that would still keep the staff member within their shift hours and get them back to the same base at the end of their shift then that is surely just a kind of change that I or many others in multiple industries would consider to be one that an employer is perfectly entitled to make.

It all depends on particular depots rostering agreements.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

I wonder if that previous poster means that he thinks TOCs should be making explicit announcements to blame traincrew for trains not running, so putting all visible frontline staff at even more risk of abuse and assault than they normally face. That would be a pretty despicable viewpoint, so I imagine something else might have been intended.

Doing so would be a very silly idea for the reason emboldened, but simply "staff shortages" would surely be an accurate enough reason without prompting attitudes of contempt for staff, as you said above.

After all, when Southern suffered from a spike in driver sickness, I don't believe they said trains were cancelled due to "lots of drivers getting ill." I don't think customers necessarily need to know why there are staff shortages, unless it's part of a direct strike which this is not. Most customers wouldn't know what "working to rule" is anyway.

One customer who had an advance ticket from Darlington, was told on Twitter to stick to his booked service even though, at the time, it was running 105 late (1E03 from Stirling). Needless to say, he gave up and went home (hopefully with a fee-free refund!)

This is poor treatment from LNER. Usually they're rather good at letting you use other services where expecting you to stick to the booked service is unreasonable..

 

[43066]

If LNER were explicit, and said "staff are turning up and doing exactly what they are paid to do", which would be a factual statement, I suspect I know how the public would respond.

I'm sure this is what TUC means, he's surely not suggesting the company should misinform the public by suggesting people doing what they're contracted to are in some way letting the public down? I mean, that would be remarkably bizarre, and factually inaccurate, he'd not advocate that sort of dishonesty, would he?

Indeed.

And an of course, any abuse whatsoever, and staff are quite within their rights to simply walk off the job.

I doesn't cover it well tbh if it is a staff absence that in non-dispute times would likely have been covered perfectly well.

It covers it in plenty enough detail for the public. Most of whom do not take an obsessive interest in the minutiae of rostering arrangements. The train doesn’t have a driver or guard is the factually correct reason.

I recognise that it is not always simple or possible, but swops of crews or trainsets are part of everyday business,

Swapping crews away from booked turns isn’t really part of every day businesses, this is how spares and standbys are used.

If staff were being asked to work outside of their shift times for that day, that is clearly up to them whether to agree. However, if it is a change that would still keep the staff member within their shift hours and get them back to the same base at the end of their shift then that is surely just a kind of change that I or many others in multiple industries would consider to be one that an employer is perfectly entitled to make.

As explained various times it isn’t that simple in a safety critical industry where fatigue management and the importance of breaks are sacrosanct. You’ll find that’s also the case in similar sectors such as aviation.
What happens in other types of industries has absolutely no bearing on this.

It would be good for LNER to be explicit about that, if that is the case, and let the public respond as they choose. They are a publicly owned company so transparency is important.

What specifically did you mean here, please? Are you suggesting TOCs should make inflammatory announcements that would risk incitement of abuse of traincrew or other staff members?

Doing so would be a very silly idea for the reason emboldened, but simply "staff shortages" would surely be an accurate enough reason without prompting attitudes of contempt for staff, as you said above.

Indeed.