• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

RMT settle dispute with Greater Anglia

Status
Not open for further replies.

AlterEgo

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
20,032
Location
No longer here
Are the Government picking up the tab for industrial action costs with the Greater Anglia franchise?

To answer my own question here, just had a brief look at the franchise agreement.

Yes, Government will (almost certainly) pick up the tab. Same as with GTR.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Domh245

Established Member
Joined
6 Apr 2013
Messages
8,426
Location
nowhere
To answer my own question here, just had a brief look at the franchise agreement.

Yes, Government will (almost certainly) pick up the tab. Same as with GTR.

And SWR, it looks like the section of Force Majeure is a generic one for all franchises. That said, it does come with strings attached -

The occurrence, and continuing existence of a Force Majeure Event shall be subject to satisfaction of the following conditions:

...snipped...

(d) the relevant event did not occur as a result of:
(i) any act or omission to act by the Franchisee or its agents or subcontractors, save that in respect of the occurrence of Industrial Action in accordance with paragraph 1.2(f), the provisions of paragraph 2.2 apply; or
(ii) the Franchisee's own contravention of, or default under, the Franchise Agreement, any Access Agreement, Rolling Stock Related Contract, Property Lease or any other agreement;
(e) the Franchisee used and continues to use all reasonable endeavours to avert or prevent the occurrence of the relevant event and/or to mitigate and minimise the effects of such event on its performance of the Passenger Services and to restore the provision of the Passenger Services as soon as reasonably practicable after the onset of the occurrence of such event; and
(f) the Franchisee shall, to the extent reasonably so requested by the Secretary of State, exercise its rights and remedies under any relevant agreement to prevent the occurrence or recurrence of any such event and to obtain appropriate redress and/or compensation from any relevant person.

2.2 Where:
(a) Industrial Action in accordance with paragraph 1.2(f) occurs as a result of an act or omission to act by the Franchisee or its agents or subcontractors;
(b) the Secretary of State reasonably believes that it was reasonable for the Franchisee, its agents or subcontractors (as the case may be) so to act or omit to act; and
(c) the other conditions specified in paragraph 2.1 have been satisfied, such occurrence shall be a Force Majeure Event.

1.2(f) any strike or other Industrial Action by any or all of the employees of the Franchisee or any or all of the employees of:
(i) Network Rail;
(ii) the operator of any other railway facility; or
(iii) any person with whom the Franchisee has a contract or arrangement for the lending, seconding, hiring, contracting out or supervision by that person of train drivers, conductors, other train crew or station or depot staff used by the Franchisee in the provision of the Franchise Services,
or of the agents or subcontractors of any such person listed in paragraphs 1.2(f)(i) to (iii) and for the purposes of this paragraph Industrial Action shall include any concerted action taken in connection with the employment of such employees (whether or not that action involves any breach of such employees' conditions of employment, and including any action taken in furtherance of a dispute, or with a view to improving the terms of employment of the relevant employees or by way of support for any other person) subject always, in the case of any unofficial Industrial Action, to the Franchisee being able to demonstrate the occurrence of such unofficial Industrial Action to the reasonable satisfaction of the Secretary of State.

Section 2.2(b) (which I've emphasised) seems to be a good catch all however
 

kw12

Member
Joined
12 Jan 2017
Messages
180
Several. However the intention of the strikes is not to disrupt passengers, it is to inconvenience the company, which is occurring to good effect.
The Greater Anglia guards must be relieved and very pleased that their industrial action is not inconveniencing the travelling public.
 

jamesontheroad

Established Member
Joined
24 Jan 2009
Messages
2,032
Several. However the intention of the strikes is not to disrupt passengers, it is to inconvenience the company, which is occurring to good effect.

The Greater Anglia guards must be relieved and very pleased that their industrial action is not inconveniencing the travelling public.

The threat of further strike days is much greater to Abellio now because (from what I've heard) they have just about used up all the available goodwill from managers elsewhere in the country. Consider the industrial action on Wednesday 27 December 2017. In order to run the scheduled services from the start of service that day, managers from all over the country had to curtail their Christmas time off to travel to London and East Anglia on Boxing Day. That cost a pretty penny, and next time round they might have to wave a lot more cash at the scabs... AHEM, sorry... 'managers', to persuade them to take one or more nights away from home.
 

Carlisle

Established Member
Joined
26 Aug 2012
Messages
4,122
The threat of further strike days is much greater to Abellio now because (from what I've heard) they have just about used up all the available goodwill from managers elsewhere in the country. Consider the industrial action on Wednesday 27 December 2017. In order to run the scheduled services from the start of service that day, managers from all over the country had to curtail their Christmas time off to travel to London and East Anglia on Boxing Day. That cost a pretty penny, and next time round they might have to wave a lot more cash at the scabs... AHEM, sorry... 'managers', to persuade them to take one or more nights away from home.
If your a member of staff I think you’d get a bit more respect if you attempted to explain or debate the issues both sides still need to resolve in order to settle this particular dispute, rather than just making daft insults at the company
 
Last edited:

the sniper

Established Member
Joined
4 Sep 2007
Messages
3,500
If your a member of staff, I think you’d get a bit more respect if you at least attempted to explain the issues both sides still need to resolve in order to settle this particular dispute, rather than simply making daft insults at the company .

Surely the experts here don't need to be informed of anything by staff involved. You already know better.

Maybe he doesn't desire your respect, Master?
 

Carlisle

Established Member
Joined
26 Aug 2012
Messages
4,122
Surely the experts here don't need to be informed of anything by staff involved. You already know better.

Maybe he doesn't desire your respect, Master?
Ok,I suppose you suggest I just disappear and admire the likes of Mummar Gadaffi, I mean after all at least he went down fighting.:(
 
Last edited:

kw12

Member
Joined
12 Jan 2017
Messages
180
The threat of further strike days is much greater to Abellio now because (from what I've heard) they have just about used up all the available goodwill from managers elsewhere in the country. Consider the industrial action on Wednesday 27 December 2017. In order to run the scheduled services from the start of service that day, managers from all over the country had to curtail their Christmas time off to travel to London and East Anglia on Boxing Day. That cost a pretty penny, and next time round they might have to wave a lot more cash at the scabs... AHEM, sorry... 'managers', to persuade them to take one or more nights away from home.
With East Anglia nearer The Netherlands than northern England, some of the contingency guards may have needed to travel further (as the crow flies) than if they lived in (certain parts of) The Netherlands. If they wished, could Abellio train and use some of its (English speaking) Netherlands based staff as contingency guards? Or does trade union/employment legislation prohibit employers from using non UK based staff to cover work normally undertaken by employees taking strike action (similar to the restriction that prevents employers hiring agency workers to undertake this work)?
 

jamesontheroad

Established Member
Joined
24 Jan 2009
Messages
2,032
If your a member of staff I think you’d get a bit more respect if you attempted to explain or debate the issues both sides still need to resolve in order to settle this particular dispute, rather than just making daft insults at the company

I am not a member of Abellio staff, but I am a regular passenger.

My point still stands, regardless of your insinuations.

It cost GA and Abellio a lot of money to compensate managers from around the country (yes, even Scotland) to cover staff taking industrial action. Many of those that had to miss part of their Christmas holiday time with family and friends to travel down to East Anglia and spend nights in hotels away from home have expressed a strong reluctance to do so again. So if GA staff and Unions call for more industrial action, it will be much harder for Abellio to rely on the goodwill of staff in other Abellio companies to come to the rescue. The threat of further industrial action is, therefore, worth avoiding as much as possible.
 

Sleepy

Established Member
Joined
15 Feb 2009
Messages
1,537
Location
East Anglia
and the clock is ticking for the new trains. ASLEF have indicated they will not discuss implementation of new stock until guard dispute is sorted out. GA is not taking as much revenue as expected and stabling of new stock both short and long term is still up in the air. Abellio and their partner must be getting worried how this franchise is turning out to be several cans of worms ?
 

Carlisle

Established Member
Joined
26 Aug 2012
Messages
4,122
and the clock is ticking for the new trains. ASLEF have indicated they will not discuss implementation of new stock until guard dispute is sorted out. GA is not taking as much revenue as expected and stabling of new stock both short and long term is still up in the air. Abellio and their partner must be getting worried how this franchise is turning out to be several cans of worms ?
All the more reason for those in charge ie govt/DFT /Abellio, to keep cool heads, try and learn from what went wrong on Southern, and ensure our railways are run for the benefit of the majority of users long term. This probably entails not being rushed or bullied into a short sighted peace at any price deal from Mick Cash.even if that does involve some more strikes in order to get there
 
Last edited:

The Ham

Established Member
Joined
6 Jul 2012
Messages
10,282
and the clock is ticking for the new trains. ASLEF have indicated they will not discuss implementation of new stock until guard dispute is sorted out. GA is not taking as much revenue as expected and stabling of new stock both short and long term is still up in the air. Abellio and their partner must be getting worried how this franchise is turning out to be several cans of worms ?

Lesson: how to ensure that unions are seen as outdated by the public 101:

Step one, keep using the same tactics regardless of the situation

Step two, don't be willing to allow new trains to be used so that you can prove a point

Step three, wait for the bad press following the fact that said trains are sat unused and the old stock is unable to provide extra capacity elsewhere.

Step four, find out that the government has brought in new rules stopping your old tactics following the political fallout of the above.

Step five, realise that you may have won that battle but you have now have lost the ability to use your old tactics and the public are clearly not on your side. As all they want is to go about their business and don't understand what all the fuss is about given that they see both dispatch methods being used without either apearing to cause problems. Even if they want to believe that guard dispatch is safer all they see is the unions repeating that it is safer as if they repeat it enough times it will make it true. Yet not pushing for other things that would potentially save more lives, such as all guards being first aid trained.

Step six, also realise that actually the number of rail staff has been increasing across the board and that trying to be protectionist wasn't really needed anyway.

Step seven, repeat until your union is a lame duck and automation comes in unopposed.
 

Bromley boy

Established Member
Joined
18 Jun 2015
Messages
4,611
All the more reason for those in charge ie govt/DFT /Abellio, to keep cool heads, try and learn from what went wrong on Southern, and ensure our railways are run for the benefit of the majority of users long term. This probably entails not being rushed or bullied into a short sighted peace at any price deal from Mick Cash.even if that does involve some more strikes in order to get there

By triggering the worst industrial dispute in a generation, which has so far wasted £millions in public money for very little if any benefit, those in charge haven’t been doing a particularly good job of things so far, that’s for sure.
 

Carlisle

Established Member
Joined
26 Aug 2012
Messages
4,122
By triggering the worst industrial dispute in a generation, which has so far wasted £millions in public money for very little if any benefit, those in charge haven’t been doing a particularly good job of things so far, that’s for sure.
Your right in the sense that below the Govt/ DFT level those in charge are only really concerned for their own business/patch which doesn’t help, but any TOC that’d attempted to make-any meaningful changes to the on board role would’ve faced the same response from the RMT ,(remember ScotRail and GWR tried first) so the dispute was largely unavoidable.at some point .
 
Last edited:

BestWestern

Established Member
Joined
6 Feb 2011
Messages
6,736
Your right in the sense that below the Govt/ DFT level those in charge are only really concerned for their own business/patch, but whichever TOC had attempted make-any meaningful changes to the on board role would’ve faced the same response from the RMT , so the dispute was largely unavoidable.at some point .

So leave it alone! The DfT goal of true DOO and all the Guards in line at their local Job Centre has failed. The masterplan fell flat on its backside at GTR, which far from being a pioneering victory is now paying people Guards' salaries for doing far less work, with an agreement with Aslef that ensures they'll continue doing so for the forseeable future. They achieved absolutely nothing of any value. The DfT and their puppets utterly trashed a major southeast commuter railway in the process, and managed to garner no more support from the public than the striking workforce did. A failure, a very big expensive one. It is also quite patently the case that the requirement to ensure the disabled and the vulnerable are able to use our railways just the same as everybody else means that DOO, far from being the ideal operating system of the future that the government likes to pretend it is, is in fact every bit as unsuitable and outdated in today's railway environment as the unions who oppose it supposedly are. Trains need staff, leave them to do their jobs.
 

LAX54

Established Member
Joined
15 Jan 2008
Messages
3,753
so, were the Lewisham trains DOO ? and if so, had a Guard been on each of the trains, would the result have been different ?
 

Bromley boy

Established Member
Joined
18 Jun 2015
Messages
4,611
Your right in the sense that below the Govt/ DFT level those in charge are only really concerned for their own business/patch which doesn’t help, but any TOC that’d attempted to make-any meaningful changes to the on board role would’ve faced the same response from the RMT ,(remember ScotRail and GWR tried first) so the dispute was largely unavoidable.at some point .

I think the RMT’s response was quite predictable. I do think they should now be more pragmatic, recognise the OBS role and start working with TOCs.

So leave it alone! The DfT goal of true DOO and all the Guards in line at their local Job Centre has failed. The masterplan fell flat on its backside at GTR, which far from being a pioneering victory is now paying people Guards' salaries for doing far less work, with an agreement with Aslef that ensures they'll continue doing so for the forseeable future. They achieved absolutely nothing of any value. The DfT and their puppets utterly trashed a major southeast commuter railway in the process, and managed to garner no more support from the public than the striking workforce did. A failure, a very big expensive one. It is also quite patently the case that the requirement to ensure the disabled and the vulnerable are able to use our railways just the same as everybody else means that DOO, far from being the ideal operating system of the future that the government likes to pretend it is, is in fact every bit as unsuitable and outdated in today's railway environment as the unions who oppose it supposedly are. Trains need staff, leave them to do their jobs.

Indeed.

Some two years after these disputes began, it’s difficult to see what has really been achieved from the DFT’s perspective. Little if any cost saving, which in any case is massively outweighed by the cost of the disruption resulting from the industrial action and won’t be realised for many years. Little if any benefit for passengers, it sounds like very few trains were ever cancelled due to the lack of a guard.

You wonder whether anyone has ever sat down and done a cost benefit analysis or simply asked “is it worth it?”.

They’ve attempted to force DOO through at any cost, and have so far largely failed at doing anyway in the true sense of only having a driver on board.

All those millions wasted that could presumably have been used on the NHS or other public services. It smacks of incompetence and I can see why people believe it’s motivated by an ideological agenda. There simply doesn’t seem to be much of a rational basis for it.
 
Last edited:

Domh245

Established Member
Joined
6 Apr 2013
Messages
8,426
Location
nowhere
One can only assume that they are playing the long game. Go through the expensive battle now and then drop all of the OBSs over the course of the next franchise, assuming that they can drop them and don't run into issues with DOO on the accessibility front.
 

Bromley boy

Established Member
Joined
18 Jun 2015
Messages
4,611
One can only assume that they are playing the long game. Go through the expensive battle now and then drop all of the OBSs over the course of the next franchise, assuming that they can drop them and don't run into issues with DOO on the accessibility front.

I’m sure you’re right but I can’t help but think they thought things would play out differently than they have done. Dropping the OBSs and getting round disability are both very big “ifs” at this stage, given the agreement with ASLEF, and years away in any case.

Overall I think anyone who pays tax in the U.K. should be seriously questioning whether it has been worth it. Personally I’d far rather the government abandoned the crusade for DOO and stopped wasting money on politically motivated industrial disputes, especially when we are told there is insufficient money to fund other projects like electrification.
 

BestWestern

Established Member
Joined
6 Feb 2011
Messages
6,736
One can only assume that they are playing the long game. Go through the expensive battle now and then drop all of the OBSs over the course of the next franchise, assuming that they can drop them and don't run into issues with DOO on the accessibility front.

Indeed, that's always been the plan. However, as you quite rightly say, there are increasingly likely to be significant problems with that going forwards. Unless of course the Tories decide to have a go at just rewriting the law on such matters.
 

Carlisle

Established Member
Joined
26 Aug 2012
Messages
4,122
I’m sure you’re right but I can’t help but think they thought things would play out differently than they have done. Dropping the OBSs and getting round disability are both very big “ifs” at this stage, given the agreement with ASLEF, and years away in any case.

Overall I think anyone who pays tax in the U.K. should be seriously questioning whether it has been worth it. Personally I’d far rather the government abandoned the crusade for DOO and stopped wasting money on politically motivated industrial disputes, especially when we are told there is insufficient money to fund other projects like electrification.
It’s certainly debatable whether the Southern approach was ultimately good or poor for the railway, but being unable to change anything because you can’t afford the cost of industrial action isn’t an argument that’s going to stand the test of time either. in any industry, anywhere really .
 
Last edited:

Robertj21a

On Moderation
Joined
22 Sep 2013
Messages
7,518
Indeed, that's always been the plan. However, as you quite rightly say, there are increasingly likely to be significant problems with that going forwards. Unless of course the Tories decide to have a go at just rewriting the law on such matters.

Has it 'always been the plan' ?

I know various people on this forum like to believe that OBS would be dropped asap but I don't recall seeing it written down as anybody's plan. Is there a link to it ?
 

BestWestern

Established Member
Joined
6 Feb 2011
Messages
6,736
Has it 'always been the plan' ?

I know various people on this forum like to believe that OBS would be dropped asap but I don't recall seeing it written down as anybody's plan. Is there a link to it ?

*Sigh...:rolleyes:

We've done this to the death. Document on the RSSB website setting out 'Pathway to DOO', etc etc...

I know some people refuse to accept that there was ever such an agenda - rather oddly, given that the government posted a open public document setting out the various options for doing it, and that the GTR saga was initially based on an exhaustive list of 'OBS exempt' situations which made the whole concept of the job entirely superfluous - but I'm satisfied that the intent was very clear indeed. If others prefer the Trump-esque 'alternative facts' version that says DOO was never really on the cards and it's all been invented by the unions, then they're welcome to their belief. Maybe the RMT hacked the RSSB and planted that document on their website...8-);)
 

Robertj21a

On Moderation
Joined
22 Sep 2013
Messages
7,518
*Sigh...:rolleyes:

We've done this to the death. Document on the RSSB website setting out 'Pathway to DOO', etc etc...

I know some people refuse to accept that there was ever such an agenda - rather oddly, given that the government posted a open public document setting out the various options for doing it, and that the GTR saga was initially based on an exhaustive list of 'OBS exempt' situations which made the whole concept of the job entirely superfluous - but I'm satisfied that the intent was very clear indeed. If others prefer the Trump-esque 'alternative facts' version that says DOO was never really on the cards and it's all been invented by the unions, then they're welcome to their belief. Maybe the RMT hacked the RSSB and planted that document on their website...8-);)

Right, so there wasn't anything factual about OBS being dropped asap ?.

Nothing at all that you can link to ?

Just what a few people with their own agendas liked to believe ?
.
 

BestWestern

Established Member
Joined
6 Feb 2011
Messages
6,736
Right, so there wasn't anything factual about OBS being dropped asap ?.

Nothing at all that you can link to ?

Just what a few people with their own agendas liked to believe ?
.

Indeed. As I said, feel free to believe whatever you prefer. I know where my thoughts lie, and the vast majority with an informed view of the matter.

That Putin bloke has no idea about nerve agent in Salisbury, either. Well, he hasn't written it down anyway... ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top