Northern's Problems in the North West

[R Trevithick]

Maybe it is time to close this thread.

Once again it has become a “let’s have a go at Train Drivers and/or unions” thread.

Not sure how any of this is on topic but instead is clearly inspired by jealousy of the fact that Aslef have managed to look after their members in this industry and other workers in other industries have long since sold out.

 

[yorksrob]

Caviar and smoked salmon? What's wrong with a voucher for a Greggs meal deal?

indeed. Premier inn do a very splendid full English for £9.50.

Travelodge, you might be stuck with their croissant in a box !

I travelled out to Wigan on Saturday again, and things seemed to be on more of an even keel than last week.

 

[Tomnick]

All this discussion to try to eliminate a ten minute (thereabouts) allowance for reading notices, which could only really be eliminated for jobs where the first part involves 'passing' to another location? I'm sure that electronic notices will become more widespread (I understand that many freight drivers, at least, receive notices in this format?) as the issue of suitable electronic devices becomes more widespread. In the meantime - what's the point of changing a system that obviously works?

 

[JonathanP]

Not sure how any of this is on topic but instead is clearly inspired by jealousy of the fact that Aslef have managed to look after their members in this industry and other workers in other industries have long since sold out.

It's not about "looking after your members" or "selling out". Passenger TOCS live in a completely different world from everyone else when it comes to industrial action. Can you really not see that?

In virtually any other industry, losing a days pay for the workers and a days revenue for the company is just a minor side effect of industrial action, the real damage is that if the disruption continues, all your customers will leave and they will never come back.

Meanwhile at a company like Northern, which has a government-protected monopoly and a captive market, the drivers effectively have guaranteed jobs for life barring a complete economic meltdown, and the company suffers only limited financial damage from industrial action. Consequently the unions have no reason not to hold out for anything they can get, and the company has no incentive to compromise.

If ASLEF were to try their tactics in any other industry, and the management refused to make any concessions, all their members would be out of a job within weeks.

I actually think the reaons for poor state of industrial relations on the railways lay on both sides of the table, since neither side has any incentive to compromise.
However, for those of us outside the railway bubble, where employees and employers for the most part need to work together to make the company a success(or lose their jobs!), where agreeing to reasonable requests from your employer is the norm, it's sad to see the amount of inefficency in the rail industry, the level of resistance to tackling it, and the attitude that any change is an opportunity to extract as many concessions as possible from the company. It doesn't help that many railway workers seem to be completely oblivious to the fact that the reason they are so successful in industrial relations is not a strong union, but that no matter how unhappy the passengers are, most have no realistic alternative but to use the train.

 

[Robertj21a]

It's not about "looking after your members" or "selling out". Passenger TOCS live in a completely different world from everyone else when it comes to industrial action. Can you really not see that?

In virtually any other industry, losing a days pay for the workers and a days revenue for the company is just a minor side effect of industrial action, the real damage is that if the disruption continues, all your customers will leave and they will never come back.

Meanwhile at a company like Northern, which has a government-protected monopoly and a captive market, the drivers effectively have guaranteed jobs for life barring a complete economic meltdown, and the company suffers only limited financial damage from industrial action. Consequently the unions have no reason not to hold out for anything they can get, and the company has no incentive to compromise.

If ASLEF were to try their tactics in any other industry, and the management refused to make any concessions, all their members would be out of a job within weeks.

I actually think the reaons for poor state of industrial relations on the railways lay on both sides of the table, since neither side has any incentive to compromise.
However, for those of us outside the railway bubble, where employees and employers for the most part need to work together to make the company a success(or lose their jobs!), where agreeing to reasonable requests from your employer is the norm, it's sad to see the amount of inefficency in the rail industry, the level of resistance to tackling it, and the attitude that any change is an opportunity to extract as many concessions as possible from the company. It doesn't help that many railway workers seem to be completely oblivious to the fact that the reason they are so successful in industrial relations is not a strong union, but that no matter how unhappy the passengers are, most have no realistic alternative but to use the train.

Nice to have some sensible comments on here even if you are about to be 'slaughtered'.

 

[farleigh]

I do think the public will become more sympathetic to a government who will smash the rail unions if this continues.

 

[driver_m]

It's not about "looking after your members" or "selling out". Passenger TOCS live in a completely different world from everyone else when it comes to industrial action. Can you really not see that?

In virtually any other industry, losing a days pay for the workers and a days revenue for the company is just a minor side effect of industrial action, the real damage is that if the disruption continues, all your customers will leave and they will never come back.

Meanwhile at a company like Northern, which has a government-protected monopoly and a captive market, the drivers effectively have guaranteed jobs for life barring a complete economic meltdown, and the company suffers only limited financial damage from industrial action. Consequently the unions have no reason not to hold out for anything they can get, and the company has no incentive to compromise.

If ASLEF were to try their tactics in any other industry, and the management refused to make any concessions, all their members would be out of a job within weeks.

I actually think the reaons for poor state of industrial relations on the railways lay on both sides of the table, since neither side has any incentive to compromise.
However, for those of us outside the railway bubble, where employees and employers for the most part need to work together to make the company a success(or lose their jobs!), where agreeing to reasonable requests from your employer is the norm, it's sad to see the amount of inefficency in the rail industry, the level of resistance to tackling it, and the attitude that any change is an opportunity to extract as many concessions as possible from the company. It doesn't help that many railway workers seem to be completely oblivious to the fact that the reason they are so successful in industrial relations is not a strong union, but that no matter how unhappy the passengers are, most have no realistic alternative but to use the train.

Yet again, another non-railway person who thinks aslef are a 1970s dinosaur union. How many times does it have to be said that if you create a valuable commodity, you have to pay the going rate. Other TOC drivers are on more and recieve these incentives that Northern are now getting. ASLEF at Northern have merely fought to get their members what the rest of us have. It's a bit like the model that you have to pay a wedge to get CEOs for FTSE 100 companies because they're in demand. Northern lose drivers hand over fist because their pay is uncompetitive and maybe if they paid the going rate, they wouldn't, and therefore keep training costs down. That's capitalism for you unfortunately.

 

[driver_m]

Nice to have some sensible comments on here even if you are about to be 'slaughtered'.

You mean comments that agree with your viewpoint? I'd look in the mirror if I were you before throwing the 'sensible' comment around .

 

[Bovverboy]

I don't propose to get involved in the argument re how much a driver should earn. If someone can command a high salary, whether by market forces, or by union strength, then good luck to them. However, I would like to have a go at exploding a couple of myths which have been perpetuated, not only on and off on this forum, but probably infinitely more so in the media.
Myth No.1: Northern's problems are a consequence of the timetable change.
Reality: Things were going adrift long before then.
Myth No.2: It's all Network Rail's fault, for delivering infrastructure upgrades late.
Reality: Overrunning of infrastructure work is always a possibility and is something which has to be accepted. You can estimate how long a job is likely to take, and add a certain amount on for contingency, but at the end of the day you can never be absolutely sure how long it will actually take. I believe the Manchester to Preston works hit unexpected problems, and it didn't help that a main contractor decided to throw in the towel.

 

[driver_m]

I don't propose to get involved in the argument re how much a driver should earn, if someone can command a high salary, whether by market forces, or by union strength, then good luck to them. However, I would like to have a go at exploding a couple of myths which have been perpetuated, not only on and off on this forum, but probably infinitely more so in the media.
Myth No.1: Northern's problems are a consequence of the timetable change.
Reality: Things were going adrift long before then.
Myth No.2: It's all Network Rail's fault, for delivering infrastructure upgrades late.
Reality: Overrunning of infrastructure work is always a possibility and is something which has to be accepted. You can estimate how long a job is likely to take, and add a certain amount on for contingency, but at the end of the day you can never be absolutely sure how long it will actually take. I believe the Manchester to Preston works hit unexpected problems, and it didn't help that a main contractor decided to throw in the towel.

You're right. Ultimately, this should be costing Chris Grayling his job. He is the transport minister and he's failed badly at overseeing this. NR have been awful in recent years, Grayling has been giving no f's about the North and it's took social media outrage to push this into the rest of the media and now he's rightly facing some heat. He could have stopped Thameslink doing their big bang, he didn't and could have stopped Northern's big bang .He didn't. There's a lot of issues built up into a perfect storm up here and ultimately, one of the most incompetent ministers ever known in this country should carry the can. You only have to ask anyone in the legal profession or justice to see how useless grayling is.

 

[quantinghome]

I don't propose to get involved in the argument re how much a driver should earn. If someone can command a high salary, whether by market forces, or by union strength, then good luck to them. However, I would like to have a go at exploding a couple of myths which have been perpetuated, not only on and off on this forum, but probably infinitely more so in the media.
Myth No.1: Northern's problems are a consequence of the timetable change.
Reality: Things were going adrift long before then.
Myth No.2: It's all Network Rail's fault, for delivering infrastructure upgrades late.
Reality: Overrunning of infrastructure work is always a possibility and is something which has to be accepted. You can estimate how long a job is likely to take, and add a certain amount on for contingency, but at the end of the day you can never be absolutely sure how long it will actually take. I believe the Manchester to Preston works hit unexpected problems, and it didn't help that a main contractor decided to throw in the towel.

Agreed. It seems strange that CEOs' ever-increasing salaries and bonuses are greeted with a shrug of the shoulders or an explanation of how this is actually a good thing for everyone. Then when train drivers obtain, through market forces, a reasonable pay increase the same people throw their hands up and demand that Something Must Be Done.

I travelled on the Bolton line last week and the physical electrification works are still some way off completion. Quite how NR thought they could be completed and commissioned in time for the timetable change is beyond me. RAIL magazine has some interesting insights as well - like how Network Rail dismissed the initial timetable for Thameslink as unworkable back in 2013, how the DfT dithered for months before giving the go ahead to the proposed phased implementation of the new GTR timetable, that the ORR demanded that NR make cuts to their timetabling staff, just as some of the biggest timetable changes in decades were being considered. Never has the case for clear lines of communication and accountability been needed more. Grayling has ultimate responsibility over this and needs to take it.

I think it was a mistake to bring in new timetables prior to the arrival of new trains. Let the new infrastructure and trains bed in, then change the timetable.

 

[northwichcat]

I think it was a mistake to bring in new timetables prior to the arrival of new trains. Let the new infrastructure and trains bed in, then change the timetable.

The plan was to do the timetable changes in 2 phases - December 2017 to make use of the additional 319s and 150s and December 2019 once all the cascaded trains from Scotrail have arrived and most of the new trains are in service.

 

[Robertj21a]

You mean comments that agree with your viewpoint? I'd look in the mirror if I were you before throwing the 'sensible' comment around .

Of course they're comments that agree with my viewpoint. That's why I said they were sensible - indeed, a breath of fresh air.
Not sure why I need to look in a mirror to know what I believe to be sensible ?

 

[nedchester]

It's not about "looking after your members" or "selling out". Passenger TOCS live in a completely different world from everyone else when it comes to industrial action. Can you really not see that?

In virtually any other industry, losing a days pay for the workers and a days revenue for the company is just a minor side effect of industrial action, the real damage is that if the disruption continues, all your customers will leave and they will never come back.

Meanwhile at a company like Northern, which has a government-protected monopoly and a captive market, the drivers effectively have guaranteed jobs for life barring a complete economic meltdown, and the company suffers only limited financial damage from industrial action. Consequently the unions have no reason not to hold out for anything they can get, and the company has no incentive to compromise.

If ASLEF were to try their tactics in any other industry, and the management refused to make any concessions, all their members would be out of a job within weeks.

I actually think the reaons for poor state of industrial relations on the railways lay on both sides of the table, since neither side has any incentive to compromise.
However, for those of us outside the railway bubble, where employees and employers for the most part need to work together to make the company a success(or lose their jobs!), where agreeing to reasonable requests from your employer is the norm, it's sad to see the amount of inefficency in the rail industry, the level of resistance to tackling it, and the attitude that any change is an opportunity to extract as many concessions as possible from the company. It doesn't help that many railway workers seem to be completely oblivious to the fact that the reason they are so successful in industrial relations is not a strong union, but that no matter how unhappy the passengers are, most have no realistic alternative but to use the train.

I would tend to agree with that (not just ASLEF though) as someone who was a union rep outside of the rail industry but now works in the rail industry.

 

[Rail Blues]

Tim Farron was making noise about Northern being stripped of the franchise, due to poor performance.

I have a dim and distant memory of this happening in the early 2000s due to poor performance. What were the circumstances behind this?

 

[nedchester]

Tim Farron was making noise about Northern being stripped of the franchise, due to poor performance.

I have a dim and distant memory of this happening in the early 2000s due to poor performance. What were the circumstances behind this?

I think Tim Farron thinks the Lakes Line will suddenly start operating normally if that happens!

Deluded doesn't even come close!

 

[Moonshot]

I think Tim Farron thinks the Lakes Line will suddenly start operating normally if that happens!

Deluded doesn't even come close!

indeed...stripping Arriva from the franchise does not change the fact that there are inherent operational issues just now.....the RMT strike wont be going away anytime soon as an example

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think Tim Farron thinks the Lakes Line will suddenly start operating normally if that happens!

Well, it could...if the DfT agreed to abandon DOO permanently.

 

[Steddenm]

There's a special Granada Reports tonight at 6pm about the rail problems. (ITV & ITV HD, Granada Region only)

 

[Moonshot]

o just getting back to the topic of NR problems ...what have we done in the last few dayss?

1 - Took out 165 services on a temporary basis to give the timetable a bit more resilience
2 - Drivers are now working rest days.

It also looks like Network Rail are taking some possessions a little earlier

 

[MDB1images]

You know things are bad when all the ITV various Northern regions join up to do a Northern Rail special as tonight's program.

 

[CdBrux]

A lady, Sheila Keith, representing northern has just appeared on the TV. Amongst what she said was that planning timetable changes and all its implications for people, training whatever normally happens 9 months ahead, and (as we know) this was a particularly big one. However once the Preston to Salford electrification delay was officially communicated by NR they only had 12 weeks to adjust / remake plans. She also said the new (planned) timetable was what passengers wanted.

Now several things occur to me from this:
1. Awareness of customers: now they would probably be by and large very happy if the new timetable worked. But they would be far happier of the old timetable was still in place vs the mess that happened
2. If they only have 12 weeks to do what normally takes 9 months then they should have told DfT that they would have to postpone the changes to December
3. Who at the DfT / ORR thought that whatever the situation Northern probably never had a hope of getting it right given all the circumstances and therefore a delay would be sensible.

To me it smacks of poor project management all round and probably a fear to escalate an obvious issue.

 

[YorkshireBear]

A lady, Sheila Keith, representing northern has just appeared on the TV. Amongst what she said was that planning timetable changes and all its implications for people, training whatever normally happens 9 months ahead, and (as we know) this was a particularly big one. However once the Preston to Salford electrification delay was officially communicated by NR they only had 12 weeks to adjust / remake plans. She also said the new (planned) timetable was what passengers wanted.

Now several things occur to me from this:
1. Awareness of customers: now they would probably be by and large very happy if the new timetable worked. But they would be far happier of the old timetable was still in place vs the mess that happened
2. If they only have 12 weeks to do what normally takes 9 months then they should have told DfT that they would have to postpone the changes to December
3. Who at the DfT / ORR thought that whatever the situation Northern probably never had a hope of getting it right given all the circumstances and therefore a delay would be sensible.

To me it smacks of poor project management all round and probably a fear to escalate an obvious issue.

I was a big shouter for just keep all the timetables the same. But the VTEC and EMT timetables all were intertwined with thameslink and they interacted with cross country and TPE who interactes with Northern. There was no way of delaying it without delaying thameslink. Which obviously the DfT could not condone politically.

Poor PM all round yes. But it just goes to show how essential the electrification at bolton is, its a major part of the current chaos!

 

[CdBrux]

Fair point, maybe some halfway house could have been found?
Another thought is that the 12 weeks notice that Bolton electrification was not going to have been delivered on time seems bizarre having read the, admittedly interested amateurs on these forums following that project. That must have been known at least 6 months in advance that they were going to, or very likely going to not meet the target. Would have given more time to work on plan B

 

[YorkshireBear]

Fair point, maybe some halfway house could have been found?
Another thought is that the 12 weeks notice that Bolton electrification was not going to have been delivered on time seems bizarre having read the, admittedly interested amateurs on these forums following that project. That must have been known at least 6 months in advance that they were going to, or very likely going to not meet the target. Would have given more time to work on plan B

Yes and for me that is biggest disgrace from Network Rail in recent times. They seem to wait until the last moment even though its obvious. I first heard the rumour in october 2017!

As if people are sat around going, no you tell them, no you tell them! No you tell them! No im not doing it you tell them! Avoiding doing anything difficult, typical of modern project management in my opinion.

 

[Bevan Price]

Agreed. It seems strange that CEOs' ever-increasing salaries and bonuses are greeted with a shrug of the shoulders or an explanation of how this is actually a good thing for everyone. Then when train drivers obtain, through market forces, a reasonable pay increase the same people throw their hands up and demand that Something Must Be Done.

.

People do complain about excessive pay for some CEOs & directors. But the problems are that.

1. Cosy little clubs, often called remuneration committees, decide pay policy; the members of said committees are usually directors or senior executives themselves - and probably anticipate whose own pay will be dragged upwards on the coat tails of the "top earners".

2. Even if all the small shareholders vote against remuneration policies, they will lose the vote because they are outvoted by large corporate shareholders - whose policy is decided by senior executives & directors - and who are also likely to benefit indirectly by upward trends in pau / bomus policies for senior staff.

As for train drivers - by historic standards, pay levels are quite high, compared with the situation 40+ years ago. But - unlike now - there was a single BR, and , a single national pay system. It was only after Major's sell-off that TOCs started to "poach" crews from other TOCs by offering better pay.

 

[morgainelive]

The itv regional news coming together report programme has been put on the itv granada reports page in full if anyone's interested interview with a regional director whatever they do

 

[furnessvale]

As for train drivers - by historic standards, pay levels are quite high, compared with the situation 40+ years ago. But - unlike now - there was a single BR, and , a single national pay system. It was only after Major's sell-off that TOCs started to "poach" crews from other TOCs by offering better pay.

AIUI ASLEF approached the TOCs at privatisation with an offer of national bargaining but were rebuffed.

From the TOCs point of view, one of the worst decisions they ever made.

From the drivers' point of view, one of the better ones the TOCs made as pay leapfrogged.

 

[urbophile]

I've just returned to Liverpool from Manchester Airport and was relieved and delighted that the train was neither cancelled nor late. After worrying whether I'd made the right decision for the outward journey a week ago on the first ordinary weekday of the Lime Street blockade at least that train ran too, albeit somewhat delayed.

However, why was the decision made to swap the route from the electrified Chat Moss line to the non-electrified CLC, and thereby downgrade the rolling stock from the comparatively clean and quiet 319s to the smelly, rattly and dirty DMUs (150s? - I'm not au fait with all the class numbers) and even Pacers? Not exactly the best welcome to Britain for foreign visitors. Liverpool is an increasingly important tourist destination and while JLA is served by many airlines from many continental airports, from many places Manchester is the best or only available airport.

Such visitors will not just be put off by the state of the trains, they will be totally befuddled by the information on offer at MCR airport station. Admittedly this is likely only to be a short term problem, but during the Lime Street closure trains are terminating at Liverpool South Parkway. There needs to be clear information that this is the case and that connections are available onto replacement buses or Merseyrail services. Yet if you look at the electronic indicator opposite the ticket office on the upper level, you will find nothing about that, and nothing about any trains serving Liverpool, Lime street or South Parkway. Instead (and I did a double take when I saw this) you see the Liverpool train described as destination 'Allerton'!!! Allerton station ceased to exist in name several years ago when it was subsumed into LSP. How could anyone not from Merseyside, let alone from another country, be expected to know this?

It's true that the proper information is provided on the screens at platform level. But someone could easily miss a train scratching their heads and running around trying to find somebody with the right information, before going down the escalator and discovering this.

 

[B&I]

It's not about "looking after your members" or "selling out". Passenger TOCS live in a completely different world from everyone else when it comes to industrial action. Can you really not see that?

In virtually any other industry, losing a days pay for the workers and a days revenue for the company is just a minor side effect of industrial action, the real damage is that if the disruption continues, all your customers will leave and they will never come back.

Meanwhile at a company like Northern, which has a government-protected monopoly and a captive market, the drivers effectively have guaranteed jobs for life barring a complete economic meltdown, and the company suffers only limited financial damage from industrial action. Consequently the unions have no reason not to hold out for anything they can get, and the company has no incentive to compromise.

If ASLEF were to try their tactics in any other industry, and the management refused to make any concessions, all their members would be out of a job within weeks.

I actually think the reaons for poor state of industrial relations on the railways lay on both sides of the table, since neither side has any incentive to compromise.
However, for those of us outside the railway bubble, where employees and employers for the most part need to work together to make the company a success(or lose their jobs!), where agreeing to reasonable requests from your employer is the norm, it's sad to see the amount of inefficency in the rail industry, the level of resistance to tackling it, and the attitude that any change is an opportunity to extract as many concessions as possible from the company. It doesn't help that many railway workers seem to be completely oblivious to the fact that the reason they are so successful in industrial relations is not a strong union, but that no matter how unhappy the passengers are, most have no realistic alternative but to use the train.

Of course, this applies just as forcefully to the bubble TOCs inhabit. Perhaps if they were subject to real commercial pressures, rather than a guranteed income subsidised by the state, they would actually employ enough drivers to run the services, as the unions have been arguing for

I do think the public will become more sympathetic to a government who will smash the rail unions if this continues.

Or perhaps to one who will smash the TOCs, if that is what it takes to provide a proper service

You're right. Ultimately, this should be costing Chris Grayling his job. He is the transport minister and he's failed badly at overseeing this. NR have been awful in recent years, Grayling has been giving no f's about the North and it's took social media outrage to push this into the rest of the media and now he's rightly facing some heat. He could have stopped Thameslink doing their big bang, he didn't and could have stopped Northern's big bang .He didn't. There's a lot of issues built up into a perfect storm up here and ultimately, one of the most incompetent ministers ever known in this country should carry the can. You only have to ask anyone in the legal profession or justice to see how useless grayling is.

However, disaster at Northern will not cost Grayling his job. Few existing or potential Tory votes will have been lost as a result of it. Hence, it does not matter to the people in charge

I've just returned to Liverpool from Manchester Airport and was relieved and delighted that the train was neither cancelled nor late. After worrying whether I'd made the right decision for the outward journey a week ago on the first ordinary weekday of the Lime Street blockade at least that train ran too, albeit somewhat delayed.

However, why was the decision made to swap the route from the electrified Chat Moss line to the non-electrified CLC, and thereby downgrade the rolling stock from the comparatively clean and quiet 319s to the smelly, rattly and dirty DMUs (150s? - I'm not au fait with all the class numbers) and even Pacers? Not exactly the best welcome to Britain for foreign visitors. Liverpool is an increasingly important tourist destination and while JLA is served by many airlines from many continental airports, from many places Manchester is the best or only available airport.

Such visitors will not just be put off by the state of the trains, they will be totally befuddled by the information on offer at MCR airport station. Admittedly this is likely only to be a short term problem, but during the Lime Street closure trains are terminating at Liverpool South Parkway. There needs to be clear information that this is the case and that connections are available onto replacement buses or Merseyrail services. Yet if you look at the electronic indicator opposite the ticket office on the upper level, you will find nothing about that, and nothing about any trains serving Liverpool, Lime street or South Parkway. Instead (and I did a double take when I saw this) you see the Liverpool train described as destination 'Allerton'!!! Allerton station ceased to exist in name several years ago when it was subsumed into LSP. How could anyone not from Merseyside, let alone from another country, be expected to know this?

It's true that the proper information is provided on the screens at platform level. But someone could easily miss a train scratching their heads and running around trying to find somebody with the right information, before going down the escalator and discovering this.

Do you see the mistake you made there ? You expected Liverpool to receive a proper railway service